Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Appendix D - Residential Development Site Archeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation
CONFIDENTIAL Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Walnut Property Project San Bernardino County, California Prepared For: Diversified Pacific 10621 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Prepared By: 215 North 5th Street Redlands, California 92374 October 2024 Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property Project i October 2024 2023-193 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY Diversified Pacific retained ECORP Consulting, Inc. in 2023 to conduct a cultural resources inventory for the Walnut Property Project in San Bernardino County, California. The Proposed Project would involve the construction of a residential community consisting of 393 dwelling units on an approximately 30.71-acre plot of land. The property is currently designated Multi Family Medium/High Residential (R-MFMH) in the City’s General Plan. The Project proposes to amend this General Plan land use designation to Multi Family Residential (R-MF). The Proposed Project would feature a combination of two-story cluster homes, two- story motor court, and two-story townhomes. The unit mix would consist of 103 detached cluster units in 6 and 8 pack configurations with sizing from 1,700 to 1,900 square feet. Additionally, 113 detached motor court units clustered in 6 and 8 pack configurations with sizing from 1,600 to 1,900 square feet are proposed. Lastly, 177 attached townhome units arranged in 5, 6, and 7 pack configurations are proposed, which would range from 1,100 to 1,700 square feet. Each house would include a garage fitting two cars. The Project would also accommodate street parking with 126 open-air parking spaces. The Project is proposed to be a gated community with ingress and egress off Knox Avenue and Walnut Street. The entries would open up to the recreational and common areas located throughout the Project. The proposed amenities would include a recreational center with a pool, spa, BBQ’s and lounging areas. The Project proposes a park on the northeastern edge of the Project Site, large open grass areas, including one such area adjacent to the northern boundary of the site, shaded sitting areas, play areas, and a paseo with playground equipment. The inventory included a records search, literature review, and field survey. The records search results indicated that one previous cultural resources study had been conducted within the Project Area. As a result of that study, no sites were recorded within the Project Area. As a result of the field survey, ECORP recorded four historic-period resources within the Project Area: FW-1, FW-2, FW-3, and FW-4. ECORP evaluated the resources using the National Register of Historic Places and California Register of Historical Resources eligibility criteria and determined that they are ineligible for listing on both registers under all criteria. Recommendations for the management of unanticipated discoveries are provided. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property Project ii October 2024 2023-193 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Location and Description.................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Area of Potential Effects ................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Regulatory Context ............................................................................................................................................. 3 1.3.1 National Environmental Policy Act .............................................................................................. 3 1.3.2 National Historic Preservation Act ............................................................................................... 4 1.3.3 California Environmental Quality Act.......................................................................................... 5 1.4 Report Organization .......................................................................................................................................... 7 2.0 SETTING ................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Environmental Setting ....................................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Vegetation and Wildlife .................................................................................................................................... 8 3.0 CULTURAL CONTEXT .......................................................................................................................................................... 8 3.1 Regional Pre-Contact History ......................................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Local Pre-Contact History ................................................................................................................................ 8 3.2.1 Paleo-Indian Period/Terminal Pleistocene (12,000 to 10,000 BP) ................................... 9 3.2.2 Early Archaic Period/Early Holocene (10,000 to 8,500 BP) ................................................. 9 3.2.3 Encinitas Tradition or Milling Stone Period/Middle Holocene (8,500 to 1,250 BP)............................................................................................................................................................. 9 3.2.4 Palomar Tradition (1,250 – 150 BP) .......................................................................................... 11 3.3 Ethnohistory ....................................................................................................................................................... 11 3.4 Regional History ............................................................................................................................................... 12 3.5 Fontana Area History ...................................................................................................................................... 13 4.0 METHODS ............................................................................................................................................................................ 14 4.1 Personnel Qualifications ................................................................................................................................ 14 4.2 Records Search Methods .............................................................................................................................. 16 4.3 Sacred Lands File Coordination Methods .............................................................................................. 17 4.4 Other Interested Party Consultation Methods ..................................................................................... 17 4.5 Field Methods .................................................................................................................................................... 17 4.6 Research Design ............................................................................................................................................... 17 4.6.1 Research Topics for Historic Sites ............................................................................................. 18 5.0 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................................................ 19 5.1 Records Search .................................................................................................................................................. 19 Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property Project iii October 2024 2023-193 5.1.1 Previous Research ........................................................................................................................... 19 5.1.2 Records ................................................................................................................................................ 20 5.1.3 Map Review and Aerial Photographs ...................................................................................... 21 5.2 Sacred Lands File Results .............................................................................................................................. 23 5.3 Other Interested Party Consultation Results ......................................................................................... 24 5.4 Field Survey Results and Evaluations ....................................................................................................... 24 5.4.1 Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................................... 27 5.4.2 Evaluations ......................................................................................................................................... 30 6.0 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 31 6.1 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................ 31 6.2 Likelihood for Subsurface Cultural Resources ...................................................................................... 31 6.3 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................... 31 6.3.1 Archaeological Monitoring .......................................................................................................... 31 6.3.2 Post-Review Discoveries ............................................................................................................... 31 7.0 REFERENCES CITED .......................................................................................................................................................... 33 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project Location and Vicinity .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Figure 2. Survey Coverage ............................................................................................................................................................. 25 Figure 3. Project Area Overview (view south; October 19, 2023). .................................................................................. 26 Figure 4. Project Area Overview (view northwest; October 23, 2023). ......................................................................... 26 Figure 5. Project Area Overview (view north; September 27, 2024). ............................................................................. 27 Figure 6. Overview of FW-1, Feature 1 (view north; October 23, 2023). ...................................................................... 28 Figure 7. Overview of FW-2 (view south; October 23, 2023)............................................................................................ 28 Figure 8. Overview of FW-3 (view west; October 23, 2023). ............................................................................................. 29 Figure 9. Overview of FW-4 (view south; October 23, 2023)............................................................................................ 30 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within 1 mile of the Project Area .............................................. 19 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – Records Search Confirmation and Historical Society Coordination Appendix B – Sacred Lands File Coordination Appendix C – Project Area Photographs Appendix D – Confidential Cultural Resource Site Locations and Site Records Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property Project iv October 2024 2023-193 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Term Definition AB Assembly Bill ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation APE Area of Potential Effect APN Assessor's Parcel Number BLM Bureau of Land Management BP Years before present Caltrans California Department of Transportation CCR California Code of Regulations CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CFR Code of Federal Regulations CHL California Historical Landmarks CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System CRHR California Register of Historical Resources DPR California Department of Parks and Recreation GLO General Land Office MLD Most Likely Descendant NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NPS National Park Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places OHP California Office of Historic Preservation PRC Public Resources Code RPA Registered Professional Archaeologist SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer TCRs Tribal cultural resources USGS U.S. Geological Survey Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 1 October 2024 2023-193 1.0 INTRODUCTION Diversified Pacific retained ECORP Consulting, Inc. in 2023 to conduct a cultural resources inventory for the Walnut Property Project in San Bernardino County, California. A survey of the Proposed Project Area was required to identify potentially eligible cultural resources (i.e., archaeological sites and historic buildings, structures, and objects) that could be affected by the Project. 1.1 Project Location and Description The Project Area consists of 30.71 acres of undeveloped land in the City of Fontana, California. It is located adjacent to Walnut Street to the south and South Highland Avenue to the north and is between residential developments to the east and west. The Project Area is located in the northeastern and southeastern quarters of the northwestern quarter of Section 36, and in the northwestern and southwestern quarters of the northeastern quarter of Section 36 of Township 1 North, Range 6 West, San Bernardino Base and Meridian, as depicted on the 1996 (photorevised 1999) U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Devore, California 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map (Figure 1). The Project Area comprises multiple parcels: Assessor’s Parcel Number (APNs) 0228-05-101, -114 through -117; -119 through -121, - 201, -225, -226, -227; 0228-06-102 through -114; -116 through -118; -120 through -125; and 0228-31- 105. The Proposed Project would involve the construction of a residential community consisting of 393 dwelling units on an approximately 30.71-acre plot of land. The property is currently designated Multi Family Medium/High Residential (R-MFMH) in the City’s General Plan. The Project proposes to amend this General Plan land use designation to Multi Family Residential (R-MF). The Proposed Project would feature a combination of two-story cluster homes, two-story motor court, and two-story townhomes. The unit mix would consist of 103 detached cluster units in 6 and 8 pack configurations with sizing from 1,700 to 1,900 square feet. Additionally, 113 detached motor court units clustered in 6 and 8 pack configurations with sizing from 1,600 to 1,900 square feet are proposed. Lastly, 177 attached townhome units arranged in 5, 6, and 7 pack configurations are proposed, which would range from 1,100 to 1,700 square feet. Each house would include a garage fitting two cars. The Project would also accommodate street parking with 126 open-air parking spaces. The Project is proposed to be a gated community with ingress and egress off Knox Avenue and Walnut Street. The entries would open up to the recreational and common areas located throughout the Project. The proposed amenities would include a recreational center with a pool, spa, BBQ’s and lounging areas. The Project proposes a park on the northeastern edge of the Project Site, large open grass areas, including one such area adjacent to the northern boundary of the site, shaded sitting areas, play areas, and a paseo with playground equipment. Map Date: 10/1/2024 Sources: ESRI, USGS Lo c a t i o n : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ L o c a t i o n _ V i c i n i t y \ L o c a t i o n a n d V i c i n i t y . a p r x - F W P L n V 2 0 2 4 0 5 1 7 ( t r o t e l l i n i - 1 0 / 1 / 2 0 2 4 ) Devore (1996, p.r. 1999, NAD 27) CA 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle US Geological Survey. San Bernardino County, California §36, T.01N, R.06W, SBBM Latitude (NAD83): 34.131233° Longitude (NAD83): -117.461867° Watershed: Santa Ana (18070203) I 0 1,000 2,000 Scale in Feet 2023-193 Fontana Walnut Property Property Figure 1. Project Location and Vicinity Project Area - 30.71 ac. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 3 October 2024 2023-193 1.2 Area of Potential Effects The Area of Potential Effects (APE) consists of the horizontal and vertical limits of a project and includes the area within which significant impacts or adverse effects to Historical Resources or Historic Properties could occur because of the project. The APE is defined for projects subject to regulations implementing Section 106 (federal law and regulations). For projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, the term Project Area is used rather than APE. The terms Project Area and APE are interchangeable for the purpose of this document. The horizontal APE consists of all areas where activities associated with a project are proposed and, in the case of this Project, equals the Project Area subject to environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and CEQA. This includes areas proposed for construction, vegetation removal, grading, trenching, stockpiling, staging, paving, over-excavation, backfilling, and other elements in the official Project description. The horizontal APE is illustrated in Figure 1 and represents the survey coverage area. The vertical APE is described as the maximum depth below the surface to which excavations for project foundations and facilities will extend. Therefore, the vertical APE for this Project includes all subsurface areas where archaeological deposits could be affected. The subsurface vertical APE varies across the Project Area but could extend as deep as 20 feet below the current surface, which is a typical depth for residential mainline sewers; therefore, a review of geologic and soils maps was necessary to determine the potential for buried archaeological sites that cannot be seen on the surface. The vertical APE also is described as the maximum height of structures that could impact the physical integrity and integrity of setting of cultural resources, including districts and traditional cultural properties. For this Project, the above-surface vertical APE is as high as 35 feet above the surface, which is a typical roof height for two-story residential structures in San Bernardino County. 1.3 Regulatory Context The CEQA lead agency for this Project is the City of Fontana. No federal lead agency has been identified for this Project. A review of the regulatory context is provided below; however, the inclusion of any of these laws and regulations in this report does not make a law or regulation apply when it otherwise would not. Similarly, the omission of any other laws and regulations from this section does not mean that they do not apply. Rather, the purpose of this section is to provide context in explaining why the study was carried out in the manner documented herein. 1.3.1 National Environmental Policy Act NEPA establishes national policy for the protection and enhancement of the environment. Part of the function of the federal government in protecting the environment is to “preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage.” Cultural resources need not be determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) through the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 4 October 2024 2023-193 of 1966 (as amended) to receive consideration under NEPA. NEPA is implemented by regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1500-1508). The definition of effects in the NEPA regulations includes adverse and beneficial effects on historic and cultural resources (40 CFR 1508.8). Therefore, the Environmental Consequences section of an Environmental Impact Statement [see 40 CFR 1502.16(f))] must analyze potential effects to historic or cultural resources that could result from the proposed action and each alternative. In considering whether an alternative may “significantly affect the quality of the human environment,” a federal agency must consider, among other things: Unique characteristics of the geographic area, such as proximity to historic or cultural resources (40 CFR 1508.27(b)(3)), and The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP (40 CFR 1508.27(b)(8)). Therefore, because historic properties are a subset of cultural resources, they are one aspect of the human environment defined by NEPA regulations. 1.3.2 National Historic Preservation Act The federal law that covers cultural resources that could be affected by federal undertakings is the NHPA of 1966, as amended. Section 106 of the NHPA requires that federal agencies consider the effects of a federal undertaking on properties listed in or eligible for the NRHP. The agencies must afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking. A federal undertaking is defined in 36 CFR 800.16(y): A federal undertaking means a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of a federal agency, including those carried out by or on behalf of a federal agency; those carried out with Federal financial assistance; and those requiring a Federal permit, license, or approval. The regulations that stipulate the procedures for complying with Section 106 are in 36 CFR 800. The Section 106 regulations require: definition of the APE; identification of cultural resources within the APE; evaluation of the identified resources in the APE using NRHP eligibility criteria; determination of whether the effects of the undertaking or project on eligible resources will be adverse; and agreement on and implementation of efforts to resolve adverse effects, if necessary. The federal agency must seek comment from the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and, in some cases, the ACHP, for its determinations of eligibility, effects, and proposed mitigation measures. Section Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 5 October 2024 2023-193 106 procedures for a specific project can be modified by negotiation of a Memorandum of Agreement or Programmatic Agreement between the federal agency, the SHPO, and, in some cases, the project proponent. Effects to a cultural resource are potentially adverse if the lead federal agency, with the SHPO’s concurrence, determines the resource eligible for the NRHP, making it a Historic Property, and if application of the Criteria of Adverse Effects (36 CFR 800.5[a][2] et seq.) results in the conclusion that the effects will be adverse. The NRHP eligibility criteria, contained in 36 CFR 60.4, are as follows: The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of state and local importance that possess aspects of integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, association, and A. that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory. In addition, the resource must be at least 50 years old, barring exceptional circumstances (36 CFR 60.4). Resources that are eligible for, or listed on, the NRHP are historic properties. Regulations implementing Section 106 of the NHPA (36 CFR 800.5) require that the federal agency, in consultation with the SHPO, apply the Criteria of Adverse Effect to historic properties within the APE. According to 36 CFR 800.5(a)(1): An adverse effect is found when an undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property’s location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling or association. 1.3.3 California Environmental Quality Act CEQA is the state law that applies to a project’s impact on cultural resources. A project is an activity that may cause a direct or indirect physical change in the environment and that is undertaken or funded by a state or local agency, or requires a permit, license, or lease from a state or local agency. CEQA requires that impacts to Historical Resources be identified and, if the impacts are significant, then apply mitigation measures to reduce the impacts. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 6 October 2024 2023-193 A Historical Resource is a resource that 1) is listed in or has been determined eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) by the State Historical Resources Commission, or has been determined historically significant by the CEQA lead agency because it meets the eligibility criteria for the CRHR, 2) is included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) 5020.1(k), or 3), and has been identified as significant in a historical resources survey, as defined in PRC 5024.1(g) (California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 14, Section 15064.5(a)). The eligibility criteria for the CRHR are as follows (CCR Title 14, Section 4852(b)): (1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; (2) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history; (3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or (4) It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation. In addition, the resource must retain integrity and will be evaluated using aspects such as the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association (CCR Title 14, Section 4852(c)). Resources that have been determined eligible for the NRHP are automatically eligible for the CRHR. Impacts to a Historical Resource, as defined by CEQA (listed in an official historic inventory or survey or eligible for the CRHR), are significant if the resource is demolished or destroyed or if the characteristics that made the resource eligible are materially impaired (CCR Title 14, Section 15064.5(b)). Demolition or alteration of eligible buildings, structures, and features that they would no longer be eligible would result in a significant impact. The whole or partial destruction of eligible archaeological sites would result in a significant impact. In addition to impacts from construction resulting in destruction or physical alteration of an eligible resource, impacts to the integrity of setting (sometimes termed visual impacts) of physical features in the Project Area could also result in significant impacts. Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) are defined in Section 21074 of the California PRC as sites, features, places, cultural landscapes (geographically defined in terms of the size and scope), sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either included in or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR, or are included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1, or are a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. Section 1(b)(4) of Assembly Bill (AB) 52 established that only California Native American tribes, as defined in Section 21073 of the California PRC, are experts in the identification of TCRs and impacts thereto. Because ECORP does not meet the definition of a California Native American tribe, it only addresses information in this report for which it is qualified to identify and evaluate, and that which is needed to inform the cultural resources section of CEQA documents. This report, therefore, does not identify or evaluate TCRs. Should California Native American tribes ascribe additional importance to or Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 7 October 2024 2023-193 interpretation of archaeological resources described herein, or provide information about non- archeological TCRs, that information is documented separately in the AB 52 tribal consultation record between the tribe(s) and lead agency and summarized in the TCRs section of the CEQA document, if applicable. 1.4 Report Organization The following report documents the study and its findings and was prepared in conformance with the California Office of Historic Preservation’s (OHP) Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Contents and Format. Appendix A includes a confirmation of the records search with the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and historical society coordination. Appendix B contains documentation of a search of the Sacred Lands File. Appendix C presents photographs of the Project Area. Appendix D contains confidential cultural resource site locations and site records. Sections 6253, 6254, and 6254.10 of the California Code authorize state agencies to exclude archaeological site information from public disclosure under the Public Records Act. In addition, the California Public Records Act (Government Code § 6250 et seq.) and California’s open meeting laws (The Brown Act, Government Code § 54950 et seq.) protect the confidentiality of Native American cultural place information. Because the disclosure of information about the location of cultural resources is prohibited by the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 U.S. Code 552 470hh) and Section 307103 of the NHPA, it is exempted from disclosure under Exemption 3 of the federal Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S. Code 552) Likewise, the Information Centers of the CHRIS maintained by the OHP prohibit public dissemination of records search information. In compliance with these requirements, the results of this cultural resource investigation were prepared as a confidential document, which is not intended for public distribution. 2.0 SETTING 2.1 Environmental Setting The Project Area is located within the San Gabriel Valley, between East Etiwanda Creek to the east, and Lytle Creek to the west. The San Gabriel Mountains are located to the north of the Project Area, and the Jurupa Mountains are located farther to the south. Much of the surrounding area consists of suburban tract housing. The Project Area is connected by numerous major roadways such as Interstate (I) 210 and I- 15. Elevations within the Project Area range between 1,427 to 1,482 feet above mean sea level. 2.2 Geology and Soils The Project Area comprises two soil types: approximately 70 percent of the Project Area consists of Tujunga gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes; the remaining 30 percent consists of Soboba gravelly loamy sand, 0 to 9 percent slopes (Natural Resources Conservation Service 2023). Sediments within the Project Area consist of Holocene surficial sediments (Qa). These sediments are described as “alluvial gravel and sand of valley areas, composed of boulder gravel near mountains, grading outward into finer gravel and sand” (Dibblee and Minch 2003). Due to the likelihood of pre- Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 8 October 2024 2023-193 contact archaeological sites to be located along perennial waterways, and because the alluvial deposits were made by precursors to the current waterways (Etiwanda Creek and Lytle Creek) on either side of the Project Area, the Project Area has a moderate potential for buried pre-contact archaeological sites. 2.3 Vegetation and Wildlife The dominant plant species observed within the Project Area included turkey-mullein (Croton setiger), western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya), and Russian thistle (Salsola tragus); ECORP did not observe any native vegetation communities within the Project Area. ECORP observed coyote (Canis latrans), California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) burrows, Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) burrows, and several bird species, including house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus) and mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) (ECORP 2023). 3.0 CULTURAL CONTEXT 3.1 Regional Pre-Contact History It is generally believed that human occupation of California began at least 10,000 years before present (BP). The archaeological record indicates that between approximately 10,000 and 8,000 BP, a predominantly hunting economy existed, characterized by archaeological sites containing numerous projectile points and butchered large animal bones. Animals that were hunted probably consisted mostly of large species still alive today. Bones of extinct species have been found but cannot definitively be associated with human artifacts. Although small animal bones and plant grinding tools are rarely found within archaeological sites of this period, small game and floral foods were probably exploited on a limited basis. A lack of deep cultural deposits from this period suggests that groups included only small numbers of individuals who did not often stay in one place for extended periods (Wallace 1978). Around 8,000 BP, there was a shift in focus from hunting toward a greater reliance on plant resources. Archaeological evidence of this trend consists of a much greater number of milling tools (e.g., metates and manos) for processing seeds and other vegetable matter. This period, which extended until around 5,000 BP, is sometimes referred to as the Millingstone Horizon (Wallace 1978). Projectile points are found in archaeological sites from this period, but they are far fewer in number than from sites dating to 8,000 BP. An increase in the size of groups and the stability of settlements is indicated by deep, extensive middens at some sites from this period (Wallace 1978). 3.2 Local Pre-Contact History Archaeological evidence indicates that reliance on both plant gathering and hunting continued as in the previous period, with more specialized adaptation to particular environments in sites dating to after about 5,000 BP. Mortars and pestles were added to metates and manos for grinding seeds and other vegetable material. Flaked-stone tools became more refined and specialized, and bone tools were more common. New peoples from the Great Basin began entering Southern California during this period. These immigrants, who spoke a language of the Uto-Aztecan linguistic stock, seem to have displaced or absorbed the earlier population of Hokan-speaking peoples. During this period, known as the Late Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 9 October 2024 2023-193 Horizon, population densities were higher than before, and settlement became concentrated in villages and communities along the coast and interior valleys (Erlandson 1994; McCawley 1996). Regional subcultures also started to develop, each with its own geographical territory and language or dialect (Kroeber 1925; McCawley 1996; Moratto 1984). These were most likely the basis for the groups that the first Europeans encountered during the 18th century (Wallace 1978). Despite the regional differences, many material culture traits were shared among groups, indicating a great deal of interaction (Erlandson 1994). The presence of small projectile points indicates the introduction of the bow and arrow into the region sometime around 2,000 BP (Moratto 1984; Wallace 1978). 3.2.1 Paleo-Indian Period/Terminal Pleistocene (12,000 to 10,000 BP) The first inhabitants of southern California were big game hunters and gatherers exploiting extinct species of Pleistocene megafauna (e.g., mammoth and other Rancholabrean fauna). Local "fluted point" assemblages comprised of large spear points or knives are stylistically and technologically similar to the Clovis Paleo-Indian cultural tradition dated to this period elsewhere in North America (Moratto 1984). Archaeological evidence for this period in southern California is limited to a few small temporary camps with fluted points found around late Pleistocene Lake margins in the Mojave Desert and around Tulare Lake in the southern San Joaquin Valley. Single points are reported from Ocotillo Wells and Cuyamaca Pass in eastern San Diego County and from the Yuha Desert in Imperial County (Rondeau et al. 2007). 3.2.2 Early Archaic Period/Early Holocene (10,000 to 8,500 BP) Approximately 10,000 years ago, at the beginning of the Holocene, warming temperatures, and the extinction of the megafauna resulted in changing subsistence strategies with an emphasis hunting smaller game and increasing reliance on plant gathering. Previously, Early Holocene sites were represented by only a few sites and isolates from the Lake Mojave and San Dieguito complexes found along former lakebeds and grasslands of the Mojave Desert and in inland San Diego County. More recently, southern California Early Holocene sites have been found along the Santa Barbara Channel (Erlandson 1994), in western Riverside County (Goldberg 2001; Grenda 1997), and along the San Diego County coast (Gallegos 1991; Koerper et al. 1991; Warren 1967). The San Dieguito Complex was defined based on material found at the Harris site (CA-SDI-149) on the San Dieguito River near Lake Hodges in San Diego County. San Dieguito artifacts include large leaf- shaped points; leaf-shaped knives; large ovoid, domed, and rectangular end and side scrapers; engraving tools; and crescentics (Koerper et al. 1991). The San Dieguito Complex at the Harris site dates to 9,000 to 7,500 BP (Gallegos 1991). However, sites from this time period in coastal San Diego County have yielded artifacts and subsistence remains characteristic of the succeeding Encinitas Tradition, including manos, metates, core-cobble tools, and marine shell (Gallegos 1991; Koerper et al. 1991). 3.2.3 Encinitas Tradition or Milling Stone Period/Middle Holocene (8,500 to 1,250 BP) The Encinitas Tradition (Warren 1968) and the Milling Stone Period (Wallace 1955) refer to a long period of time during which small mobile bands of people who spoke an early Hokan language foraged for a wide variety of resources including hard seeds, berries, and roots/tubers (yucca in inland areas), rabbits Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 10 October 2024 2023-193 and other small animals, and shellfish and fish in coastal areas. Sites from the Encinitas Tradition consist of residential bases and resource acquisition locations with no evidence for overnight stays. Residential bases have hearths and fire-affected rock indicating overnight stays and food preparation. Residential bases along the coast have large amounts of shell and are often termed shell middens. The Encinitas Tradition as originally defined (Warren 1968) applied to all the non-desert areas of southern California. Recently, four patterns within the Encinitas Tradition have been proposed which apply to different regions of southern California (Sutton and Gardner 2010). The Topanga Pattern includes archaeological material from the Los Angeles Basin and Orange County. The Greven Knoll Pattern pertains to southwestern San Bernardino County and western Riverside County (Sutton and Gardner 2010). Each of the patterns is divided into temporal phases. The Topanga Pattern included the Los Angeles Basin and Orange County. The Topanga I phase extends from 8,500 to 5,000 BP and Topanga II runs from 5,000 to 3,500 BP. The Topanga Pattern ended about 3,500 BP with the arrival of Takic speakers, except in the Santa Monica Mountains where the Topanga III phase lasted until about 2,000 BP. The Encinitas Tradition in inland areas east of the Topanga Pattern (southwestern San Bernardino County and western Riverside County) is the Greven Knoll Pattern (Sutton and Gardner 2010). Greven Knoll I (9,400-4,000 BP) has abundant manos and metates. Projectile points are few and are mostly Pinto points. Greven Knoll II (4,000-3,000 BP) has abundant manos and metates and core tools. Projectile points are mostly Elko points. The Elsinore site on the east shore of Lake Elsinore was occupied during Greven Knoll I and Greven Knoll II. During Greven Knoll I faunal processing (butchering) took place at the lakeshore and floral processing (seed grinding), cooking, and eating took place farther from the shore. The primary foods were rabbit meat and seeds from grasses, sage, and ragweed. A few deer, waterfowl, and reptiles were consumed. The recovered archaeological material suggests that a highly mobile population visited the site at a specific time each year. It is possible that their seasonal round included the ocean coast at other times of the year. These people had an unspecialized technology as exemplified by the numerous crescents, a multi-purpose tool. The few projectile points suggest that most of the small game was trapped using nets and snares (Grenda 1997). During Greven Knoll II, which included a warmer drier climatic episode known as the Altithermal, it is thought that populations in interior southern California concentrated at oases and that Lake Elsinore was one of them. The Elsinore site (CA-RIV-2798) is one of five known Middle Holocene residential sites around Lake Elsinore. Tools were mostly manos, metates, and hammerstones. Scraper planes were absent. Flaked-stone tools consisted mostly of utilized flakes used as scrapers. The Elsinore site during the Middle Holocene was a “recurrent extended encampment” which could have been occupied during much of the year. The Encinitas Tradition lasted longer in inland areas because Takic speakers did not move east into these areas until circa 1,000 BP. Greven Knoll III (3,000-1,000 BP) is present at the Liberty Grove site in Cucamonga (Salls 1983) and at sites in Cajon Pass that were defined as part of the Sayles Complex (Kowta 1969). Greven Knoll III sites have a large proportion of manos and metates and core tools as well as scraper planes. Kowta (1969) suggested the scraper planes may have been used to process yucca and agave. The faunal assemblage consists of large quantities of lagomorphs (rabbits and hares) and lesser quantities of deer, rodents, birds, carnivores, and reptiles. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 11 October 2024 2023-193 3.2.4 Palomar Tradition (1,250 – 150 BP) The native people of southern California (north of a line from Agua Hedionda to Lake Henshaw in San Diego County) spoke Takic languages which form a branch or subfamily of the Uto-Aztecan language family. The Takic languages are divided into the Gabrielino-Fernandeño language, the Serrano-Kitanemuk group (the Serrano [includes the Vanyume dialect] and Kitanemuk languages), the Tataviam language, and the Cupan group (the Luiseño-Juaneño language, the Cahuilla Language, and the Cupeño language) (Golla 2011). According to Sutton (2009), Takic speakers occupied the southern San Joaquin Valley before 3,500 BP. Perhaps as a result of the arrival of Yokutsan speakers (a language in the Penutian language family) from the north, Takic speakers moved southeast. The ancestors of the Kitanemuk moved into the Tehachapi Mountains and the ancestors of the Tataviam moved into the upper Santa Clara River drainage. The ancestors of the Gabrielino (Tongva) moved into the Los Angeles Basin about 3,500 BP, replacing the native Hokan speakers. Speakers of proto-Gabrielino reached the southern Channel Islands by 3,200 BP (Sutton 2009) and moved as far south as Aliso Creek in Orange County by 3,000 BP. Takic people moved south into southern Orange County after 1,250 BP and became the ancestors of the Juaneño. Takic people moved inland from southern Orange County about 1,000 BP, becoming the ancestors of the Luiseño, Cupeño, and Cahuilla. Takic people from the Kitanemuk area moved east along the northern slopes of the San Gabriel Mountains and spread into the San Bernardino Mountains and along the Mojave River becoming the ancestors of the Serrano and the Vanyume. The material culture of the inland areas where Takic languages were spoken at the time of Spanish contact is part of the Palomar Tradition. San Luis Rey I Phase (1,000 – 500 BP) and San Luis Rey II Phase (500 – 150 BP) pertain to the area occupied by the Luiseño at the time of Spanish contact. The Peninsular I (1,000 – 750 BP), II (750 – 300 BP), and III (300 – 150 BP) Phases are used in the areas occupied by the Cahuilla and Serrano (Sutton 2011). 3.3 Ethnohistory Ethnographic accounts of Native Americans indicate that the Gabrieliño (also known as Gabrieleno, or Tongva) once occupied the region that encompasses the Project Area. At the time of contact with Europeans, the Gabrieliño were the main occupants of the southern Channel Islands, the Los Angeles Basin, much of Orange County, and extended as far east as the western San Bernardino Valley. The term “Gabrieliño” came from the group’s association with Mission San Gabriel Arcángel, established in 1771. The Gabrieliño are believed to have been one of the most populous and wealthy Native American tribes in southern California prior to European contact, (Bean and Smith 1978a; McCawley 1996; Moratto 1984) and spoke a Takic language. The Takic group of languages is part of the Uto-Aztecan language family. The Gabrieliño occupied villages located along rivers and at the mouths of canyons and ranged from 50 to 200 inhabitants. Residential structures within the villages were domed, circular, and made from thatched tule or other available wood. Gabrieliño society was organized by kinship groups, with each group composed of several related families who together owned hunting and gathering territories. Settlement patterns varied according to the availability of floral and faunal resources (Bean and Smith 1978a; McCawley 1996; Miller 1991). Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 12 October 2024 2023-193 Vegetal staples consisted of acorns, chia, seeds, piñon nuts, sage, cacti, roots, and bulbs. Animals hunted included deer, antelope, coyote, rabbits, squirrels, rodents, birds, and snakes. The Gabrieliño also fished and collected marine shellfish (Bean and Smith 1978a; McCawley 1996; Miller 1991). By the late 18th century, Gabrieliño population had significantly dwindled due to introduced European diseases and dietary deficiencies. Gabrieliño communities disintegrated as families were taken to the missions (Bean and Smith 1978a; McCawley 1996; Miller 1991). However, current descendants of the Gabrieliño are preserving Gabrieliño culture. 3.4 Regional History The first European to visit California was Spanish maritime explorer Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo in 1542. Cabrillo was sent north by the Viceroy of New Spain (Mexico) to look for the Northwest Passage. Cabrillo visited San Diego Bay, Catalina Island, San Pedro Bay, and the northern Channel Islands. The English adventurer Francis Drake visited the Miwok Native American group at Drake’s Bay or Bodega Bay in 1579. Sebastian Vizcaíno explored the coast as far north as Monterey in 1602. He reported that Monterey was an excellent location for a port (Castillo 1978). Vizcaíno also named San Diego Bay to commemorate Saint Didacus. The name began to appear on European maps of the New World by 1624 (Gudde 1998). Colonization of California began with the Spanish Portolá land expedition. The expedition, led by Captain Gaspar de Portolá of the Spanish army and Father Junipero Serra, a Franciscan missionary, explored the California coast from San Diego to the Monterey Bay Area in 1769. As a result of this expedition, Spanish missions to convert the native population, presidios (forts), and towns were established. The Franciscan missionary friars established 21 missions in Alta California (the area north of Baja California) beginning with Mission San Diego in 1769 and ending with the mission in Sonoma established in 1823. The purpose of the missions and presidios was to establish Spanish economic, military, political, and religious control over the Alta California territory. Mission San Diego was established to convert the Native Americans that lived in the area, known as the Kumeyaay or Diegueño. Mission San Gabriel Archangel was founded in 1771 east of what is now Los Angeles to convert the Tongva or Gabrielino. Mission San Fernando, also in Tongva/Gabrielino territory, was established in 1797. Mission San Juan Capistrano was established in 1776 on San Juan Creek (in what is now southern Orange County) to convert the Agjachemem or Juaneño. Mission San Luis Rey was established in 1798 on the San Luis Rey River (in what is now northern San Diego County) to convert the Luiseño. Missions San Buenaventura and Santa Barbara were founded in Chumash territory in 1782 and 1786, respectively (Castillo 1978). Some missions later established outposts in inland areas. An asistencia (mission outpost) of Mission San Luis Rey, known as San Antonio de Pala, was built in Luiseño territory along the upper San Luis Rey River near Mount Palomar in 1810 (Pourade 1961). A chapel administered by Mission San Gabriel Archangel was established in the San Bernardino area in 1819 (Bean and Smith 1978b), and another asistencia within the western outskirts of present-day Redlands was built circa 1830 (Haenszel and Reynolds 1975). The missions sustained themselves through cattle ranching and traded hides and tallow for supplies brought by ship. Large cattle ranches were established by Mission San Luis Rey at Temecula and San Jacinto (Gunther 1984). The Spanish also constructed presidios, or forts, at San Diego and Santa Barbara, and a Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 13 October 2024 2023-193 pueblo, or town, was established at Los Angeles. The Spanish period in California began in 1769 with the Portola expedition and ended in 1821 with Mexican independence. After Mexico became independent from Spain in 1821, what is now California became the Mexican province of Alta California. The Mexican government closed the missions in the 1830s and former mission lands were granted to retired soldiers and other Mexican citizens for use as cattle ranches. Much of the land along the coast and in the interior valleys became part of Mexican land grants or ranchos (Robinson 1948). During the Mexican period there were small towns at San Diego (near the presidio), San Juan Capistrano (around the mission), and Los Angeles. The rancho owners lived in one of the towns or in an adobe house on the rancho. The Mexican Period includes the years 1821 to 1848. The American period began when the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed between Mexico and the United States in 1848. As a result of the treaty, Alta California became part of the United States as the territory of California. Rapid population increase occasioned by the Gold Rush of 1849 allowed California to become a state in 1850. Most Mexican land grants were confirmed to the grantees by U.S. courts, but usually with more restricted boundaries which were surveyed by the U.S. Surveyor General’s office. Land that was not part of a land grant was owned by the U.S. government until it was acquired by individuals through purchase or homesteading. Floods and drought in the 1860s greatly reduced the cattle herds on the ranchos, making it difficult to pay the new American taxes on the thousands of acres they owned. Many Mexican-American cattle ranchers borrowed money at usurious rates from newly arrived Anglo- Americans. The resulting foreclosures and land sales transferred most of the land grants into the hands of Anglo-Americans (Cleland 1941). 3.5 Fontana Area History In 1887, the Semi-Tropic Land and Water Company purchased 28,500 acres west of Lytle Creek and planned the townsites of Rialto, Bloomington, and Rosena. The Rosena townsite is where Fontana is now. Planning for the townsite of Rosena progressed as far as laying out the street grid, but Lytle Creek proved unable to bring a reliable water supply this far west, and the company went bankrupt before Rosena could be developed. In 1905, Azariel Blanchard (A.B.) Miller and associates leased 17,000 acres of former Semi- Tropic land that had been intended for the development of the Rosena townsite from the Fontana Development Company. Using animal-drawn plows and scrapers, Miller created farms, installed irrigation, raised grain, and finally planted trees in 1910. By 1913, Miller subdivided the area into smaller plots which resulted in the establishment of the community of Fontana in 1913 as an agricultural community. In 1913, the National Old Trails Association established a portion of unpaved highway next to the railroad tracks from Rialto to Rancho Cucamonga. They made a map of the new roadway but did not label Fontana. By 1926, Route 66 had followed the National Old Trails Highway, giving Fontana a new economic corridor (City of Fontana n.d.a; Fontana Historical Society 2015; Schuiling 1984). Fontana became a popular location for livestock. By 1819, ten families were raising chickens, which became five hundred families by 1926. The United States Department of Agriculture selected Fontana for the only Experimental Rabbit Breeding Station in 1928, and later, food scraps from Los Angeles were shipped by train to feed hogs. At the start of World War II, Fontana was the home of 50,000 hogs, the largest hog ranch in the world at that time (Schuiling 1984). Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 14 October 2024 2023-193 During World War II, Henry Kaiser began steel mill operations in Fontana. By 1942, Fontana was the first town on the west coast to provide rolled steel plates which were used for Victory and Liberty class military ships. The steel mill transformed Fontana from an agricultural to an industrial city and was a major employer for many years after World War II (City of Fontana n.d.a; Schuiling 1984). On June 25, 1952, Fontana was incorporated as a city. In 1968, the City established the Downtown Redevelopment Project Area, and the Fontana Redevelopment Agency, which continues to design long- range revitalization projects in the City of Fontana (City of Fontana n.d.a., n.d.b.). In 1965, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) completed I-10, connecting Fontana with Los Angeles to the west, and San Bernardino and Arizona to the east by car. The interstate provided more traffic, but also diverted travelers away from the downtown businesses along Route 66 (City of Fontana n.d.a.; Road Trip Journeys 2019). This was likely an unintended consequence of design, since Route 66 was a roadway with businesses at its side, where travelers can pull over at any time; the interstate system is a closed system, where no businesses are at the roadside, and the roadway is entered and exited at controlled points. Today, Fontana is the second most-populous city in San Bernardino County, with retail, health care, and manufacturing as its biggest employers. Fontana’s focus from 1983 to 2006 on transforming into a bedroom community has let it to now begin attracting professional businesses and enliven its downtown district (City of Fontana City Council 2018; City of Fontana n.d.a.; Road Trip Journeys 2019; Sperling’s Best Places n.d.). This has been facilitated by I-10, I-15, and I-210 traversing the city, which allows for travel to the north, south, east, and west of the city for its residents to work elsewhere. 4.0 METHODS 4.1 Personnel Qualifications Registered Professional Archaeologist (RPA) Sonia Sifuentes, who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology, was responsible for this cultural resource investigation. Staff Archaeologist Robert J. Cunningham and Staff Archaeologist Casey LeJeune, RPA conducted the fieldwork. Associate Archaeologist Steve Wintergerst and Staff Archaeologist Julian E. Acuña, RPA conducted additional survey work. Mr. Wintergerst and Associate Archaeologist Nicholas Bizzell prepared the technical report. Lisa Westwood, RPA provided technical report review and quality assurance. Sonia Sifuentes, RPA is a Senior Archaeologist and the Southern California Cultural Resources Manager at ECORP and has more than 15 years of experience in cultural resources management, primarily in southern California. Ms. Sifuentes holds a M.S. in Archaeology of the North. She has participated in and supervised numerous surveys, test programs, and data recovery excavations for both prehistoric and historical sites; and has cataloged, identified, and curated thousands of artifacts. She has conducted evaluations of cultural resources for eligibility for the NRHP and CRHR. Ms. Sifuentes is experienced in the organization and execution of field projects in compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA and CEQA. She has contributed to and authored numerous cultural resources technical reports, research designs, and cultural resources management plans. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 15 October 2024 2023-193 Rob Cunningham has 17 years of experience in cultural resources management, with an emphasis on the recordation, analysis, and evaluation of historic-period resources. He has participated in all aspects of archaeological fieldwork, including survey, test excavation, and construction monitoring. He has served as Field Director for archaeological inventories and site evaluation projects. He has recorded and mapped numerous prehistoric and historic-period archaeological sites and has identified and documented hundreds of prehistoric and historic artifacts. Mr. Cunningham has prepared numerous archaeological site records and has authored and contributed to a variety of cultural resources technical reports. Steve Wintergerst is an Associate Archaeologist with 15 years of experience in cultural resources management. He holds a B.A. in Anthropology. Mr. Wintergerst has participated in all aspects of archaeological fieldwork and laboratory process, with extensive experience throughout California and western Arizona. His experience has involved working as an archaeological crew chief, archaeological technician, archaeological monitor, paleontological monitor, and paleontological preparator. He is experienced in the organization and execution of field projects in compliance with CEQA and Section 106 of the NHPA. Casey LeJeune, RPA is a Staff Archaeologist who has worked in cultural resource management since 2020, with experience in the southeast and southern California. She holds an M.A. in anthropology with focus in forensic anthropology and bioarchaeology. She meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology. She has participated in fieldwork on forensic and historic burials, survey, large-scale data recovery, monitoring, and in-field lithic analysis. Ms. LeJeune also has extensive lab experience in human osteology and analysis of historic and prehistoric artifacts. Nicholas Bizzell is an Associate Archaeologist with ECORP and has more than 12 years of experience in cultural resources management. He holds a B.A. in Anthropology from Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, California. Mr. Bizzell has participated in numerous archaeological projects throughout California, experience that includes working with clients in both public and private sectors. Mr. Bizzell has substantial archaeological experience with cultural resources monitoring, inventory surveys, excavation and subsurface testing, and laboratory analysis for projects in northern and southern California. Additionally, Mr. Bizzell is cross trained as a paleontological monitor for projects requiring both archaeological and paleontological monitoring. Julian E. Acuña, RPA is a Staff Archaeologist with over six years of experience in cultural resources management. Mr. Acuña holds an M.A. in Applied Archaeology and a B.A. Cum Laude in Anthropology from California State University-San Bernardino. He meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology. He has participated in various aspects of archaeological fieldwork including survey, test excavations, formal excavations and data recovery, construction monitoring, the recording of both pre-contact and historic-period archaeological sites, conducted evaluations of cultural resources for NRHP and CRHR eligibility, and laboratory work for the analysis and cataloging of artifacts from multi-component sites. He has contributed to and authored numerous cultural resources technical reports. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 16 October 2024 2023-193 Lisa Westwood, RPA has 30 years of experience and meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for prehistoric and historical archaeology. She holds a B.A. in Anthropology and an M.A. in Anthropology (Archaeology). She is the Director of Cultural Resources for ECORP. 4.2 Records Search Methods ECORP conducted a records search for the Project Area at the CHRIS South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton on October 11, 2023 (Appendix A). The purpose of the records search was to determine the extent of previous surveys within a 1-mile (1,600-meter) radius of the Project Area and whether any previously documented pre-contact or historic archaeological sites, architectural resources, or traditional cultural properties exist within this area. In addition to the CHRIS records search, the following historic references were also reviewed: Built Environment Resource Directory (OHP 2022); the National Register Information System (National Park Service [NPS] 2023); Office of Historic Preservation, California Historical Landmarks (CHLs; OHP 2023); Caltrans Local Bridge Survey (Caltrans 2024a); Caltrans State Bridge Survey (Caltrans 2024b); and Historic Spots in California (Kyle 2002).Other references examined include historic General Land Office (GLO) land patent records (Bureau of Land Management [BLM] 2023) the San Bernardino County Assessor-Recorder- Clerk website (San Bernardino County Assessor 2024a, 2024b, 2024c, 2024d), and Ancestry.com (2024a, 2024b) for names related to the parcel information. Historic maps reviewed include the following: 1885 BLM GLO Plat map for Township 1 North, Range 6 West; 1896 USGS San Bernardino, California topographic quadrangle map (1:62,500 scale); 1898 USGS San Bernardino, California topographical quadrangle map (1:62,500 scale); 1901 USGS San Bernardino, California topographical quadrangle map (1:62,500 scale); 1936 USGS Devore, California topographic quadrangle map (1:31,680 scale); 1941 USGS Devore, California topographic quadrangle map (1:31,680 scale); 1954 USGS Devore, California topographical quadrangle map (1:24,000 scale); 1966 USGS Devore, California topographical quadrangle map (1:24,000 scale); 1966 (photorevised 1980) USGS Devore, California topographical quadrangle map (1:24,000 scale); and 1966 (photorevised 1988) USGS Devore, California topographical quadrangle map (1:24,000 scale). ECORP also reviewed historic aerial photographs taken in 1938, 1948, 1959, 1966, 1980, 1985, 1994, 2002, 2009, and 2018 to determine land use practices and to look for evidence of the built environment within the Project Area (Nationwide Environmental Title Research Online, n.d.). ECORP conducted a search for local historical societies that may have information about the Project Area. The search identified the Fontana Historical Society located in the City of Fontana. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 17 October 2024 2023-193 4.3 Sacred Lands File Coordination Methods In addition to the records search, ECORP contacted the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on May 29, 2024 to request a search of the Sacred Lands File for the Project Area (Appendix B). This search determines whether Sacred Lands are recorded within the Project Area. This is because the Sacred Lands File is populated by members of the Native American community with knowledge about the locations of tribal resources. In requesting a search of the Sacred Lands File, ECORP solicited information from the Native American community regarding TCRs, but the responsibility to formally consult with the Native American community lies exclusively with the federal and local agencies under applicable state and federal laws. The lead agencies do not delegate government-to-government authority to any private entity to conduct tribal consultation. 4.4 Other Interested Party Consultation Methods ECORP emailed a letter to the Fontana Historical Society on November 6, 2023 to solicit comments or obtain historical information that the repository might have regarding events, people, or resources of historical significance in the area (Appendix A). 4.5 Field Methods ECORP conducted an intensive pedestrian survey of the Project Area on October 19 and 23, 2023, May 14, 2024, and September 27, 2024 using 15-meter-spaced transects. ECORP completed the survey in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Identification of Historic Properties (NPS 1983) and spent four person-days in the field. At the time, ECORP archaeologists examined the ground surface for indications of surface or subsurface cultural resources and inspected the general morphological characteristics of the ground surface for indications of subsurface deposits that may be manifested on the surface, such as circular depressions or ditches. Whenever possible, ECORP examined the locations of subsurface exposures caused by such factors as rodent activity, water or soil erosion, or vegetation disturbances for artifacts or for indications of buried deposits. ECORP archaeologists did not conduct subsurface investigations or artifact collections during the pedestrian survey. Standard professional practice requires that all cultural resources encountered during a survey be recorded using Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523-series forms approved by the California OHP. The resources are typically photographed, mapped using a handheld Global Positioning System receiver, and sketched as necessary to document their presence using appropriate DPR forms. 4.6 Research Design The California OHP requires the use of a research design that presents important research questions that are recognized for the region and are relevant to the study, based on previous research (OHP 1991). Research questions serve to guide research methods and to assess the potential for the recovery of scientifically valid data that are likely to satisfy NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4—the ability of the resource to produce information important in prehistory or history. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 18 October 2024 2023-193 4.6.1 Research Topics for Historic Sites Material from rural archaeological sites from the 19th and early 20th centuries can provide information about the developing domestic economy of farmsteads and ranches, changes in socio-economic status, and changes in the spatial organization of activities within the farmstead. Early settlers may have been relatively self-sufficient by producing most of the food on the farm for their own consumption. Over time, they may have increasingly participated in the developing market economy by exchanging their agricultural products for manufactured goods obtained from towns. Some farmers/ranchers may have specialized in a single crop or product and ceased to produce food for domestic consumption; they would have therefore obtained all of their food from stores in the nearest town. The socio-economic status of rural residents may also have changed based on increased access to markets for their agricultural products and changing commodity prices. By about 1920, most rural residents fully participated in the national economic system and agriculture had become mechanized. For the period since c. 1920, there is little additional information that historical archaeology can provide about rural ranching and farming that is not already known from historical sources. Research topics include the following: 1. Self-sufficiency versus participation in a market economy. Were food and household items produced on the farm or obtained from local, regional, or national sources? Did the degree of self-sufficiency decrease over time? This research topic can be addressed if artifacts for which place of manufacture can be determined, such as bottles and ceramics with makers’ marks, are found. 2. Socio-economic status. What was the socio-economic status of rural residents, as reflected in material possessions? Did socio-economic status change over time? This research topic can be addressed if artifacts from which status can be inferred are found. For example, porcelain ceramics and champagne bottles would indicate higher status, and earthenware ceramics and whiskey bottles would indicate lower status. Whether more- or less-expensive cuts of meat were consumed can be determined by looking at which animal bones are present and how they were butchered. 3. Organization of activities. What was the spatial organization of activities within the farmstead and did this change over time in conjunction with increased production for the market? This research topic can be addressed if building foundations and other features are present and if artifacts classified functionally are present to provide information about the functions of the buildings and features. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 19 October 2024 2023-193 5.0 RESULTS 5.1 Records Search The records search consisted of a review of previous research and archival records on file with the SCCIC, as well as historical aerial photographs and maps of the Project Area and vicinity. 5.1.1 Previous Research The records search identified 12 previous cultural resource investigations within a 1-mile radius of the Project Area, covering approximately 25 percent of the total area within the records search radius. Of the 12 studies, two were conducted within the Project Area. Appendix A provides a list of all of reports within the records search radius. These studies revealed the presence of pre-contact sites, including lithic scatters and milling sites, and historical sites, including the remains of historic structures. The previous studies were conducted between 1976 and 2017 and vary in size from 8 to 323 acres. The results of the records search indicate that more than 85 percent of the Project Area has been previously surveyed for cultural resources; however, these studies were completed more than 7 years ago. Therefore, a pedestrian survey was warranted due to a lack of previous survey coverage of the entire Project Area. The records search also identified 13 previously recorded cultural resources within a 1-mile radius of the Project Area. Of these, 12 resources are historic-era sites associated with residential, commercial building foundations from the 1930s (including historic-period Baseline Road), and an agricultural reservoir from pre-1900. One resource contains pre-contact and historic-period occupation components. No previously recorded cultural resources are within or adjacent to the Project Area. Table 1. Previously Recorded Cultural Resources within 1 mile of the Project Area Site Number (CA-SBR) Primary Number (P-36-) Year and Recorder Age/Period Site Description 7325 7325 1992 Sutton/Zeller Historic Foundations, landscaping/orchard, road/trail 9363H 9363 1997 McKenna et al.; 2010 Lindsay Andrews, Southern California Edison Historic Foundations, water conveyance 9364H 9364 1997 McKenna et al. Historic Foundations, landscaping, refuse, wells 9365H 9365 1997 McKenna et al. Multicomponent Wall/fence, standing structure, lithic scatter, bedrock milling feature 9367H 9367 1996 Shepard Historic Well/cistern Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 20 October 2024 2023-193 – 15497 1973 unknown; 2014 Josh Smallwood, Helix Historic Baseline Road – 19911 2004 Bai "Tom" Tang & Josh Smallwood, CRM Tech Historic Single-family property – 19912 2004 Bai "Tom" Tang, CRM Tech Historic Single-family property – 19913 2004 Bai "Tom" Tang, CRM Tech Historic Single-family property – 20338 2004 Jeanette A. McKenna, McKenna et al. Historic Single-family property – 20915 2009 Terri Jacquemain, CRM Tech Historic Single-family property – 20916 2009 Terri Jacquemain, CRM Tech Historic Single-family property – 20918 2009 Terri Jacquemain, CRM Tech Historic Single-family property 5.1.2 Records The OHP’s Built Environment Resource Directory for San Bernardino County (dated September 2, 2022) does not list any resources within the Project Area itself but does list two built environment resources within the 1-mile search radius: a privately owned house at 6110 Cooper Avenue in Fontana (built in 1963), and the Sunrise Market at 6498 Catawba Avenue. The National Register Information System (NPS 2023) does not list any eligible or listed properties within 1 mile of the Project Area. The nearest National Register property is Bono’s Restaurant and Deli, which is located approximately 1.6 miles south of the Project Area. The National Register Information System also notes the presence of the Fontana Pit and Groove Petroglyph site somewhere within the city limits; an online search suggests that the site is somewhere in the Jurupa Hills, which are located far to the south of the Project Area. ECORP reviewed resources listed as CHLs by the OHP (2023) on September 14, 2023. The nearest listed landmark is CHL No. 950, the United States Rabbit Experimental Station. The plaque is located 2.5 miles southeast of the Project Area. Historic Spots in California (Kyle 2002) mentions the City of Fontana as having been part of the Rancho San Bernardino land grant. In 1900, the Fontana Development Company reorganized this land into several small farms for sale. Originally named Rosena, A.B. Miller renamed the area Fontana in 1913. In 1928, the Federal Government established the first and only experimental station focused on breeding rabbits. This Station operated at 8384 Cypress Avenue until 1965. The City of Fontana now operates this former breeding station as a senior center. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 21 October 2024 2023-193 By 1942, when America entered World War II, Henry Kaiser built a steel mill in Fontana that produced a significant portion of steel for American Naval vessels. The Kaiser Steel Mill operated until it was purchased by the California Steel Company in 1984. Historic GLO land patent records from the BLM’s patent information database (BLM 2023) revealed that all of Section 36 of Township 1 North, Range 6 West was patented to the State of California on April 23, 1874 as a grant of 960 acres under the authority of the March 3, 1853 California Enabling Act (10 Stat. 244), which extended preemption rights to alternating sections of public lands along railroads. A review of landownership data at the San Bernardino County Assessor’s office for the four parcels the present study identified resources (APNs 22806122, 22805227, 22806102, 22806103) revealed the following: The first listed owner of Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 22806122 is Emanuel Faith Rest Home in 1981. It was then transferred to individual ownership later in the year. The last recorded owner is Fontana Unified School District (San Bernardino County Assessor 2024a). The first listed owner of APN 22805227 is Marguerite Lattimore Flewellen in 1984 (Ancestry 2024a). The last recorded owner is Fontana Unified School District (San Bernardino County Assessor 2024b). The first listed owner of APN 22806102 is Dorothy Ivery. The last recorded owner is Fontana Unified School District (San Bernardino County Assessor 2024c). The first listed owners of APN 22806103 are S.E. and Willie Harris (Ancestry 2024b). The last recorded owner is Fontana Unified School District (San Bernardino County Assessor 2024d). The Caltrans Bridge Local and State Inventories (Caltrans 2024a, 2024b) did not list any historic bridges within 1 mile of the Project Area. State bridges within 1 mile of the Project Area were made between 2000 and 2001 when former Highland Avenue was upgraded to I-210. The Handbook of North American Indians (Bean and Smith 1978a) does not list Native American villages for the Gabrieleno because they had been relegated to missions by the time of anthropological research. San Gabriel Mission is located approximately 36 miles west of the Project Area. San Bernardino, which was the site of the San Gabriel Mission’s asistencia, is located approximately 15 miles southwest of the Project Area. 5.1.3 Map Review and Aerial Photographs The review of historical aerial photographs and maps of the Project Area provides information on the past land uses of the Project Area and potential for buried archaeological sites. This information shows that the Project Area was initially used for agriculture. Following is a summary of the review of historical maps and photographs. The 1885 BLM GLO Plat map for Township 1 North, Range 6 West (dated November 13, 1885) depicts the Project Area as vacant and labels the area that includes the Project Area as “Chaparral”. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 22 October 2024 2023-193 The 1896, 1898, and 1901 USGS San Bernardino, California topographical quadrangle maps (1:62,500 scale) depict a straight east–west road (likely a precursor to South Highland Avenue) within the northernmost portion of the Project Area. The 1936 and 1941 USGS Devore, California topographical quadrangle maps (1:31,680 scale) depict the Project Area as completely undeveloped land. The maps depict Highland Avenue to the north and outside of the Project Area; the road is located farther north compared to its present- day alignment and is possibly within the present-day I-210 right of way. The maps also depict Walnut Street as an unimproved roadway located outside of and to the south of the Project Area. An aerial photograph from 1938 shows that the Project Area is undeveloped. The photograph shows Walnut Street as an unimproved road/trail located to the south of the Project Area. An aerial photograph from 1948 shows that the portion of Knox Avenue that is within the Project Area has been paved to its present-day extent; the road continues southward as an unimproved road for an additional 1,000 feet. The photograph shows that the Project Area is undeveloped; however, it also shows residential structures to the immediate north of the Project Area, on both sides of Knox Avenue. The 1954 USGS Devore, California topographical quadrangle map (1:24,000 scale) depicts an unnamed road that likely corresponds to Knox Avenue within the Project Area. The map depicts eight structures within the Project Area. Outside of the Project Area, the map depicts Walnut Street as an unimproved road that runs eastward to Citrus Avenue; Walnut Street is not present south of the Project Area. To the east and outside of the Project Area, the map depicts a roadway that corresponds with present-day Almeria Avenue, in addition to some homes along the roadway. The map depicts Gilfillan Airport to the west of the Project Area and Highland Avenue as a highway to the north of the Project Area. An aerial photograph from 1959 shows a structure visible at APN 22805117, on the western side of Knox Avenue. The photograph also shows structures within APN 22805227 (which contains resource FW-2, described further in Section 5.4.1.2), APN 22806122 (FW-1), APN 22806102 (FW- 3), and APN 22806103 (FW-4), all of which are located to the south and east of Knox Avenue. The photograph shows two additional structures on the western side of Knox Avenue, just south of where present-day South Highland Avenue is located; a structure is visible within APN 22805120- 000. Almeria Avenue, which is located to the east of the Project Area, is paved. The photograph also shows some houses to the east of the Project Area. An aerial photograph from 1966 shows that the structure within APN 22806102 is no longer extant; this structure appeared to be a propane tank in aerial photographs from 1959. The structure within 22805120-000 is also no longer extant. The rest of the Project Area appears unchanged compared to the aerial photographs from 1959. The 1966 USGS Devore, California topographical quadrangle map (1:24,000 scale) depicts Knox Avenue as an improved roadway along the northern part of the Project Area. It continues southward as an unimproved roadway before turning eastward and joining Almeria Avenue Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 23 October 2024 2023-193 outside of the Project Area. The map depicts more structures along Knox Avenue compared to the 1954 map; however, most of these are located to the north of the Project Area. The 1966 (photorevised 1980) USGS Devore, California topographical quadrangle map (1:24,000 scale) depicts additional features within the Project Area consisting of a structure on the western side of Knox Avenue and an extension of Knox Avenue that now continues to the southern end of the Project Area. Outside of the Project Area, the map depicts Walnut Avenue now extending westward to meet the southern end of Knox Avenue. An unimproved roadway has also been added outside the Project Area, around Gilfillan Airport. An aerial photograph from 1980 shows that APN 22805117 does not contain any structures, although a residence and auxiliary building are present within APN 22805116, on the western side of Knox Avenue. The structure at APN 22806103 and the eastern structure within APN 22806122 are not visible. A new structure is visible within APN 22805120-000. Aerial photographs from 1985 show that the Project Area is unchanged compared to the previously mentioned 1980 aerial photograph. The 1966 (photorevised 1988) USGS Devore, California topographical quadrangle map (1:24,000 scale) depicts additional structures within the Project Area: the map depicts a structure on the western side of Knox Avenue and a structure on the eastern side of Knox Avenue. Aerial photographs from 1994 show that APN 22806122 is covered with a large quantity of unknown material. An aerial photograph from 2002 shows South Highland Avenue, which was not visible in the 1994 aerial photograph. Gilfillan Field, which is located to the west of the Project Area, is no longer present; it has been converted to a development of single-family residences. Aerial photographs from 2009 show that the structures within APNs 22805116 and 22805227 are no longer standing. Aerial photographs from 2018 show the existing structure within APN 22805101 for the first time. In sum, the Project Area was undeveloped and vacant until 1948, when portions of the Project Area began to be used for agriculture and housing. Most of the Project Area remains undeveloped and is presently owned by Fontana Unified School District and the City of Fontana. 5.2 Sacred Lands File Results A search of the Sacred Lands File by the NAHC was positive, indicating the presence of Native American cultural resources in the vicinity of the Project Area. A record of all correspondence is provided in Appendix B. The lead agencies will follow up as part of government-to-government consultation in order to determine if the project will have an effect on a sacred site. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 24 October 2024 2023-193 5.3 Other Interested Party Consultation Results ECORP has not received any responses to the letters sent to the Fontana Historical Society as of the date of the preparation of this document. 5.4 Field Survey Results and Evaluations ECORP archaeologist Casey LeJeune, RPA surveyed the Project Area for cultural resources on October 19 and October 23, 2023 . ECORP archaeologist Steve Wintergerst surveyed additional parcels added to the Project Area on May 14, 2024. ECORP archaeologist Julian Acuña surveyed additional parcel 22805120- 000 added to the Project Area on September 27, 2024. Figure 2 represents the survey coverage. ECORP surveyed the western half of the Project Area on October 19, 2023. Ground surface visibility was around 80 percent; approximately 20 percent of the area was obscured by overgrown weeds (Figures 3, 4, and 5). During the survey, the archaeologist noted that this portion of the Project Area appeared to have been previously tilled. Further ground disturbances included a push pile, which was lined up parallel to Knox Avenue, and a significant amount of debris throughout the Project Area, which mainly comprised building materials. ECORP surveyed the eastern half of the Project Area on October 23, 2023. Ground surface visibility was 80 percent; approximately 20 percent of the ground surface was obscured by weeds and grasses. ECORP conducted a supplemental survey on May 14, 2024, which covered three parcels that were added to the northern end of the western half of the Project Area. Ground surface visibility ranged from 40 to 60 percent; weeds covered the remaining areas. ECORP conducted an additional supplemental survey on September 27, 2024, which covered one parcel that was added to the northeast end of the Project Area. This parcel (22805120-000) was inaccessible as it comprises an entire residence that is currently occupied. Instead, ECORP walked the perimeter of the parcel to assess the surface area from a distance. The 2023 surveys identified four resources: FW-1, FW-2, FW-3, and FW-4. All four resources are historic- period foundations. ECORP did not identify any new archaeological resources during the 2024 survey of the three additional parcels. The following sections provide discussions of the resources. Rockwe ll Ave K n o x A v e Aerostar Ct Carave ll e Av e Skylark Ave Northst ar Av e Northwind Ave S H i ghland Ave Athena Dr Sou th wind Ave H e l e n W a y L i s a D r Eastw ind Ave Wa l nu t A ve A l m e r i a S t C a t a w b a A v e A thena D r A l m e r i a S t C a t a w ba A v e Map Date: 10/2/2024 Sources: ESRI, San Bernardino County (2023) Lo c a t i o n : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x - F W P _ S u r v e y _ C o v e r a g e _ 2 0 2 4 1 0 0 2 ( t r o t e l l i n i - 1 0 / 2 / 2 0 2 4 ) Map Contents Project Area - 30.71 ac. Survey Coverage Surveyed I 0 275 F eet 2023-193 Fontana Walnut Property Figure 2. Survey Coverage Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 26 October 2024 2023-193 Figure 3. Project Area Overview (view south; October 19, 2023). Figure 4. Project Area Overview (view northwest; October 23, 2023). Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 27 October 2024 2023-193 Figure 5. Project Area Overview (view north; September 27, 2024). 5.4.1 Cultural Resources Previous cultural resource investigations did not identify any resources within the Project Area. The 2023 and 2024 surveys conducted by ECORP identified four historic-period archaeological resources (FW-1, FW-2, FW-3, and FW-4) within the Project Area, all of which are concrete foundations from former residential structures. 5.4.1.1 FW-1, Historic-Period Foundation and Driveway Resource FW-1 is composed of two features: Feature 1 and Feature 2. Feature 1 is a small concrete house foundation and associated concrete driveway. The driveway measures 153 feet long. The foundation measures approximately 63 feet long and 17 feet wide; at the southern end of the foundation, its width is approximately 28 feet. Feature 2 is an L-shaped concrete house foundation with several mesquite trees surrounding the immediate area. The foundation measures 53 long and 50 feet wide. Resource FW-1 is within APN 22806122, which was a part of the Emanuel Faith Rest Home. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 28 October 2024 2023-193 Figure 6. Overview of FW-1, Feature 1 (view north; October 23, 2023). 5.4.1.2 FW-2, Historic-Period Foundations Resource FW-2 is composed of two features: Feature 1 and Feature 2, which both comprise small, raised concrete building foundations that are approximately 8 inches above ground surface. The remains of concrete and cinderblocks surround both foundations. The two foundations are 24 feet apart. Feature 1 measures 25 feet long and 16 feet wide. Feature 2 measures 10 feet long and 10 feet wide. Resource FW-2 is within APN 22805227, which was owned by Marguerite Flewellen in 1984. Figure 7. Overview of FW-2 (view south; October 23, 2023). Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 29 October 2024 2023-193 5.4.1.3 FW-3, Historic-Period Foundation Resource FW-3 is composed of a small rectangular concrete building or house foundation that measures 35 feet long and 17 feet wide. It is cracked, weathered, and overgrown. Resource FW-3 is within APN 22806102, which was owned by Dorothy Ivery in 1974. Figure 8. Overview of FW-3 (view west; October 23, 2023). Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 30 October 2024 2023-193 5.4.1.4 FW-4, Historic-Period Foundations Resource FW-4 is composed of three features: Features 1, 2, and 3, which comprise two concrete building foundations. Feature 1 is a concrete building foundation with a concrete barrier or retainer hardware that measures 10.4 feet wide and 10.8 feet long. Feature 2 is a smaller concrete foundation in the northeastern corner that measures 18 feet wide and 23 feet long. The Feature 2 foundation is raised 8 inches above the ground. Feature 3 is an additional small raised concrete slab that is located at the southern edge of the concrete barrier (Feature 1) and measures 3 feet long by 2 feet wide. Resource FW-4 is located within APN 22806103, which was owned by S.E. and Willie M. Harris in 1973. Figure 9. Overview of FW-4 (view south; October 23, 2023). 5.4.2 Evaluations Resources FW-1, FW-2, FW-3, and FW-4 represent the remains of former residential structures that date to the 20th century. Archival research could not associate these resources with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our local, regional, state, or national history (NRHP/CRHR Criterion A/1). Although the names of some of the owners associated with these parcels are known, none could be identified as persons of significance or importance to the local, state, or national past (NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2). The resources represent the remains of former residences and therefore lack any design characteristics unique to themselves; as such, they do not: embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic values; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction (NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3). The resources lack any surface artifacts or evidence of subsurface deposits that could provide data to address questions regarding social status or participation in the larger economy. The data potential of these resources has been exhausted by their recording and archival Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 31 October 2024 2023-193 research; as such, they do not have the potential to yield information important to the local, state, or national history or prehistory (NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4). In sum, FW-1, FW-2, FW-3, and FW-4 do not contribute to any known or suspected historic districts and are not considered Historic Properties for the purpose of NHPA Section 106, nor Historical Resources under CEQA. 6.0 MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS 6.1 Conclusions ECORP evaluated resources FW-1, FW-2, FW-3 and FW-4 using NRHP and CRHR eligibility criteria and determined that none of them are considered Historical Resources under CEQA or Historic Properties under Section 106 of the NHPA. If the City of Fontana determines that the historic-period cultural resources within the Project Area are ineligible for the CRHR and, therefore, are not Historical Resources for the purpose of CEQA, no mitigation measures for these resources will be necessary under CEQA. 6.2 Likelihood for Subsurface Cultural Resources The Project Area has a moderate potential for buried pre-contact archaeological sites due to the presence of Holocene alluvium throughout the Project Area and given the likelihood of pre-contact archaeological sites to be located along perennial waterways such as Etiwanda Creek and Lytle Creek. Therefore, ECORP recommends archaeological monitoring of Project-related ground-disturbing activities. 6.3 Recommendations 6.3.1 Archaeological Monitoring A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting or working under the direction of someone meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards, should be retained to monitor all ground- disturbing activities associated with Project construction, including vegetation removal, clearing, grading, trenching, excavation, or other activities that will disturb original (pre-Project) ground. The monitor must have the authority to temporarily pause activity at the location in the event of an unanticipated discovery, so that they can direct the procedures in the following section. Initially, one monitor may be assigned to the Project who circulates throughout all areas of active ground disturbance. In the event of an unanticipated discovery, the lead agency should reconsider the number of monitors to ensure that future discoveries are managed in accordance with state law and federal laws. 6.3.2 Post-Review Discoveries There always remains the potential for ground-disturbing activities to expose previously unrecorded cultural resources. Both CEQA and Section 106 of the NHPA require the lead agency to address any unanticipated cultural resource discoveries during Project construction. Therefore, ECORP recommends the following procedures. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 32 October 2024 2023-193 If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, all work must halt within a 100-foot radius of the discovery. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find: • If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, work may resume immediately, and no agency notifications are required. • If the professional archaeologist determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural affiliation, the archaeologist shall immediately notify the lead agencies. The agencies shall consult on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be a Historical Resource under CEQA, as defined by CEQA or a historic property under Section 106 NHPA, if applicable. Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the site either: 1) is not a Historical Resource under CEQA or a Historic Property under Section 106; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. • If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, they shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Bernardino County Coroner (per Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the California PRC, and AB 2641 will be implemented. If the coroner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, the coroner will notify the NAHC, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the Project (Section 5097.98 of the PRC). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the Project Area is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the MLD, the NAHC can mediate (Section 5097.94 of the PRC). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (Section 5097.98 of the PRC). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Information Center; using an open space or conservation zoning designation or easement; or recording a reinternment document with the county in which the Project Area is located (AB 2641). Work may not resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 33 October 2024 2023-193 7.0 REFERENCES CITED Ancestry.com. 2024a. California, U. S. Death Index, 1940-1997, for Marguerite Flewellen, https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui- content/view/2358623:5180?tid=&pid=&queryId=ea7a2519-d5af-4580-8823- 46b2a1a7ac7b&_phsrc=EYi67&_phstart=successSource. Accessed May 17, 2024. _____. 2024b. U. S. Social Security Death Index, 1935-2014, for Willie M. Harris, https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui- content/view/25879527:3693?tid=&pid=&queryId=df272386-1695-41f0-92af- be10757197e4&_phsrc=EYi49&_phstart=successSource. Accessed May 17, 2024. Bean, Lowell J. and Charles R. Smith. 1978a. Gabrielino. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 538-549. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. _____. 1978b. Serrano. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 570-574. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 2023. Bureau of Land Management, General Land Office Records, Records Automation website, https://glorecords.blm.gov/search/default.aspx. Accessed September 14, 2023. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2024a. Structure and Maintenance & Investigations, Historical Significance–Local Agency Bridges Database Last Updated April 17, 2024, https://gisdata- caltrans.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/989216729fdd41b3beb73029e000deda_0/explore?location =36.892580%2C-119.289783%2C7.00. Accessed May 14, 2024. _____. 2024b. Structure and Maintenance & Investigations, Historical Significance–State Agency Bridges Database last updated April 17, 2024, https://gisdata- caltrans.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ea685fd702f840a7a751b12373d6249c_0/explore?location =34.133471%2C-117.460649%2C15.56. Accessed May 14, 2024. Castillo, Edward D. 1978. The Impact of Euro-American Exploration and Settlement. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 99-127. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. City of Fontana. n.d.a. About the City of Fontana, https://www.fontanaca.gov/31/About-Us. Accessed September 14, 2023. _____. n.d.b. History, https://www.fontanaca.gov/75/History. Accessed July 31, 2023. City of Fontana City Council. 2018. Trends for Fontana’s Future, https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/26757/Chapter-2---Trends-for-Fontanas- Future. Accessed September 14, 2023. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 34 October 2024 2023-193 Cleland, Robert G. 1941. The Cattle on a Thousand Hills: Southern California, 1850-1870. Huntington Library, San Marino, California. Dibblee, T. W. and J. A. Minch. 2003. Geologic Map of the Devore Quadrangle San Bernardino County, California, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_71731.htm. Accessed September 11, 2023. ECORP Consulting, Inc. (ECORP). 2023. Biological Technical Report, Fontana Walnut Project, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for Diversified Pacific. Erlandson, J. M. 1994. Early Hunter-Gatherers of the California Coast. Plenum Press, New York. Fontana Historical Society. 2015. Historical Sites, http://www.fontanahistoricalsociety.com/historical- sites.html. Accessed July 28, 2023. Gallegos, D. 1991. Antiquity and Adaptation at Agua Hedionda, Carlsbad, California. In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by J. M. Erlandson and R. H. Colten, pp. 19-41. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Volume 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Goldberg, S. 2001. Eastside Reservoir Project: Final Report of Archaeological Investigations (Five volumes). Applied Earthworks, Inc., Hemet, California. Golla, V. 2011. California Indian Languages. University of California Press, Berkeley. Grenda, D. R. 1997. Continuity and Change: 8,500 Years of Lacustrine Adaptation on the Shores of Lake Elsinore: Archaeological Investigations at a Stratified Site in Southern California. Statistical Research Technical Series No 59. Statistical Research, Inc., Tucson, Arizona. Gudde, E. G. 1998. California Place Names: The Origin and Etymology of Current Geographical Names. Revised from first edition, 1949. University of California Press, Berkeley. Gunther, Jane Davies. 1984. Riverside County, California, Place Names: Their Origins and Their Stories, Rubidoux Printing Company, Riverside, CA. Haenszel, Arda M. and Jennifer Reynolds. 1975. The Historic San Bernardino Mission District. San Bernardino County Museum Association, Redlands, California. Koerper, H. C., P. Langenwalter II, and A. Schroth. 1991. Early Holocene Adaptations and the Transition Problem: Evidence from the Allan O. Kelly Site, Agua Hedionda Lagoon. In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by J. M. Erlandson and R. H. Colten, pp. 81-88. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Volume 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Kroeber, A. L. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 78. Washington. Kowta, M. 1969. The Sayles Complex: A Late Milling Stone Assemblage from Cajon Pass and the Ecological Implications of Its Scraper Planes. University of California Publications in Anthropology 6. Berkeley. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 35 October 2024 2023-193 Kyle, Douglas. 2002. Historic Spots in California. Stanford University Press. Stanford, California. McCawley, William. 1996. The First Angelinos: the Gabrielino Indians of Los Angeles. Malki Museum Press, Ballena Press, Banning, California. Miller, Bruce W. 1991. The Gabrielino. Sand River Press, Los Osos, California. Moratto, M. J. 1984. California Archaeology. Academic Press, Orlando. National Park Service (NPS). 2023. National Register of Historic Places, Digital Archive on NPGallery, https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/. Accessed September 14, 2023. _____. 1983. Archaeology and Historic Preservation: Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines. 48 FR (Federal Register) 44716-68. Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2023. Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey. http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm. Accessed September 11, 2023. Nationwide Environmental Title Research Online. n.d. Historic Aerials map viewer. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. Accessed May 6, 2024. Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). 2023. Office of Historic Preservation California Historical Landmarks Website. http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21387. Accessed September 14, 2023. _____. 2022. Office of Historic Preservation’s Built Environment Resource Directory, dated September 2, 2022 for San Bernardino County. https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30338. Accessed September 14, 2023. ______. 1991. Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs. Preservation Planning Bulletin 5. Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento. Pourade, Richard. 1961. The History of San Diego: Time of the Bells. San Diego Historical Society. https://web.archive.org/web/20020221082220/http:/www.sandiegohistory.org/books/pourade/ti me/timechapter9.htm. Accessed September 11, 2023 Road Trip Journeys. 2019. Fontana “City of Action”, https://www.theroute-66.com/fontana.html. Accessed July 28, 2023. Robinson, W. W. 1948. Land in California: The Story of Mission Lands, Ranchos, Squatters, Mining Claims, Railroad Grants, Land Scrip, Homesteads. University of California Press, Berkeley. Rondeau, M. F., J. Cassidy, and T. L. Jones. 2007. Colonization Technologies: Fluted Projectile Points and the San Clemente Island Woodworking/Microblade Complex. In California Prehistory: Colonization, Culture, and Complexity, edited by T. L. Jones and K. A. Klar, pp. 299-315. Altamira Press, Lanham, Maryland. Salls, R. A. 1983. “The Liberty Grove Site: Archaeological Interpretation of a Late Milling Stone Horizon Site on the Cucamonga Plain.” M.A. Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report ECORP Consulting, Inc. Walnut Property 36 October 2024 2023-193 San Bernardino County Assessor. 2024a. Parcel report for APN 22806122, https://pat.bhamaps.com/TabReport.aspx?appid=fd3828eb186c425d9bb76c2e2e48a198&Pa rcel=0228061220000. Accessed May 17, 2024. _____. 2024b. Parcel report for APN 22805227, https://pat.bhamaps.com/TabReport.aspx?appid=fd3828eb186c425d9bb76c2e2e48a198&Pa rcel=0228052270000. Accessed May 1 7, 2024. _____. 2024c. Parcel report for APN 22806102, https://pat.bhamaps.com/TabReport.aspx?appid=fd3828eb186c425d9bb76c2e2e48a198&Pa rcel=0228061020000. Accessed May 1 7, 2024. _____. 2024d. Parcel report for APN 22806103, https://pat.bhamaps.com/TabReport.aspx?appid=fd3828eb186c425d9bb76c2e2e48a198&Pa rcel=0228061030000. Accessed May 1 7, 2024. Schuiling, Walter C. 1984. San Bernardino County: Land of Contrasts. Windsor Publications, Woodland Hills. Sperling’s Best Places. n.d. Economy in Fontana, California, https://www.bestplaces.net/economy/city/california/fontana. Accessed July 31, 2023. Sutton, M. Q. 2011. The Palomar Tradition and Its Place in the Prehistory of Southern California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 44(4):1-74. _____. 2009. People and Language: Defining the Takic Expansion into Southern California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 41(2 and 3):31-93. Sutton, M. Q. and J. K. Gardner. 2010. Reconceptualizing the Encinitas Tradition of Southern California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 42(4):1-64. Wallace, William J. 1978. Post-Pleistocene Archeology, 9000 to 2000 BC. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8: California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 25-36. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. _____. 1955. A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11:214-230. Warren, C. N. 1968. Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast. In Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States, edited by Cynthia Irwin-Williams, pp. 1-14. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology 1. Portales, New Mexico. _____. 1967. The San Dieguito Complex: a Review and Hypothesis. American Antiquity 32:168-185. LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – Records Search Confirmation and Historical Society Coordination Appendix B – Sacred Lands File Coordination Appendix C – Project Area Photographs Appendix D – Confidential Cultural Resource Site Locations and Site Records APPENDIX A Records Search Confirmation and Historical Society Coordination Report List Report No.Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s)ResourcesOther IDs SB-00439 1976 ARCHAEOLOGICAL - HISTORICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT OF BLOOMINGTON PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT - TWO LOCATIONS SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY MUSEUM ASSOCIATION HEARN, JOSEPH E.NADB-R - 1060439; Voided - 76-11.9 SB-00867 1979 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT, 10 ACRE PARCEL ON JUNIPER BETWEEN WALNUT AND HIGHLAND AVE., FONTANA- RIALTO AREA SMITH, GERALD A.NADB-R - 1060867; Voided - 79-11.10 SB-01189 1981 CULTURAL RESOURCES REPORT ON THE RANCHO FONTANA PROJECT LOCATED IN THE FONTANA AREA OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE SURVEYS, INC. SCIENTIFIC RESOURCE SURVEYS, INC. NADB-R - 1061189; Voided - 81-9.7 SB-01501 1985 CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY REPORT FOR THE ETIWANDA PIPELINE AND POWER PLANT EIR SCIENTIFIC RESOURCES SURVEYS, INC. MASON, ROGER D.NADB-R - 1061501; Voided - 85-7.6 SB-01611 1986 A CULTURAL RESOURCES RECONNAISSANCE OF THE LA CUESTA PROPERTY, FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA RMW PALEO BISSELL, RONALD M.36-006583, 36-006584, 36-006585, 36-006586, 36-006587, 36-006588 NADB-R - 1061611; Paleo - ; Voided - 86-12.7 SB-01611A 1986 ASSESSMENT OF THE PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES FOR THE LA CUESTA SPECIFIC PLAN, FONTANA, CALIFORNIA RMW PALEO RASCHKE, ROD SB-01983 1989 HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS OF THE LA CUESTA/SIERRA LAKES TREE RELOCATION PROJECT AREA, PHASES 2, 3, 4, AND 5, FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MCKENNA ET AL.MCKENNA, JEANETTE A. NADB-R - 1061983; Voided - 89-12.3 SB-02033 1990 A PHASE I ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE PROPOSED LEWIS HOMES' PROJECT AREA, FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MCKENNA ET AL.MCKENNA, JEANETTE A. NADB-R - 1062033; Voided - 90-5.2 SB-02043 1989 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED FOOTHILL FREEWAY, LOS ANGELES AND SAN BERNARDINO COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA SUTTON, PAULA A.36-006250, 36-006251, 36-006252, 36-006253, 36-006254, 36-006255, 36-006328 NADB-R - 1062043; Voided - 89-11.7 Page 1 of 6 SBAIC 10/11/2023 3:05:58 PM Report List Report No.Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s)ResourcesOther IDs SB-02064 1990 HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS OF THE LA CUESTA/SIERRA LAKES TREE RELOCATION PROJECT AREA PHASE 6, FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MCKENNA ET AL.MCKENNA, JEANETTE A. 36-006583, 36-006585, 36-006586, 36-006587, 36-006588, 36-006589 NADB-R - 1062064; Voided - 90-1.11 SB-02527 1989 HISTORIC PROPERTY SURVEY REPORT FOR THE PROPOSED FOOTHILL FREEWAY HAMMOND, STEPHEN R. 36-006250, 36-006251, 36-006252, 36-006253, 36-006254, 36-006255, 36-006329 NADB-R - 1062527; Voided - 89-12.12 SB-02530 1989 HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY REPORT AND HISTORIC RESOURCE EVALUATION REPORT FOR A PROPOSED HIGHWAY ON NEW ALIGNMENT HARVEY SAWYERGALLUP, AARON A., BONNIE W. PARKS, DENISE O'CONNOR, and STEPHEN D. MIKESELL 36-016474NADB-R - 1062530; Voided - 89-3.12 SB-02621 1992 CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS WITHIN THE NORTH FONTANA INFRASTRUCTURE AREA, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTING SERVICES ALEXANDROWICZ, J. STEVEN, ANNE Q. DUFFIELD-STOLL, JEANETTE A. MCKENNA, SUSAN R. ALEXANDROWICZ, ARTHUR A. KUHNER, and ERIC SCOTT 36-004296, 36-006110, 36-006111, 36-006251, 36-006583, 36-006584, 36-006585, 36-006586, 36-006587, 36-006588, 36-006589, 36-006807, 36-006808, 36-006809, 36-006810, 36-006811, 36-006812, 36-006813, 36-006814, 36-006815, 36-006816 NADB-R - 1062621; Voided - 92-2.20A-B SB-02765 1993 A PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY AND INVENTORY FOR THE SIERRA LAKES WEST PROJECT AREA, FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. NADB-R - 1062765 SB-02766 1993 ADDENDUM REPORT: A PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION FOR THE SIERRA LAKES WEST PROJECT AREA, FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA MCKENNA ET ALLMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. NADB-R - 1062766 SB-03050 1995 A CULTURAL RESOURCES RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY OF WESTGATE PROPERTY (1000 +/- ACRES) IN THE CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. 36-006901NADB-R - 1063050 Page 2 of 6 SBAIC 10/11/2023 3:05:59 PM Report List Report No.Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s)ResourcesOther IDs SB-03172 1996 A PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION OF THE LANDINGS 750 LLC PROJECT AREA, A 200 +/- ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IIN NORTH FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 51PP MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. and RICHARD S. SHEPARD 36-009363, 36-009364, 36-009365NADB-R - 1063172 SB-03173 1997 PHASE III CUTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION: ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE LANDINGS 750 LLC PROJECT AREA, A 200 +/- ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED IN NORTH FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 45PP MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. and RICHARD S. SHEPARD 36-009363, 36-009364, 36-009365, 36-009366 NADB-R - 1063173 SB-03174 1996 A PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION OF THE SUMMIT HEIGHTS PROJECT AREA, LOCATED IN NORTH FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 35PP MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. and RICHARD S. SHEPARD 36-009367, 36-009368, 36-009369, 36-009370 NADB-R - 1063174 SB-03527 2000 A PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES INVENTORY OF THE FONTANA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT SITE #4 IN THE CITY OF FONTANA. 20PP MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. NADB-R - 1063527 SB-04018 2002 PROPOSED WIRELESS DEVICE MONOPINE & EQUIPMENT CABINET; COOPER SITE, 16194 CITRUS AVE, FONTANA, CA. 31PP TETRA TECH, INCBUDINGER, FREDNADB-R - 1064018 SB-04019 2002 A PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATION OF THE TENTATIVE TRACT 16291, THE RUSSO PROPERTY, IN THE CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 42PP MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. NADB-R - 1064019 SB-04020 1996 HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION & ARCHAEOLOGICAL TEST EXCAVATIONS OF HISTORIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES WITHIN THE SIERRA LAKES TREE LOCATION PROJECT AREA, FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 596PP MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. 36-006583, 36-006584, 36-006585, 36-006586, 36-006587, 36-006588, 36-006589 NADB-R - 1064020 SB-04022 1999 REPORT OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING ACTIVITIES AT THE SIERRA LAKES PROJECT SITE, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 129PP MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. 36-006583, 36-006584, 36-006585, 36-006586, 36-006587, 36-006588, 36-006589 NADB-R - 1064022 Page 3 of 6 SBAIC 10/11/2023 3:06:01 PM Report List Report No.Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s)ResourcesOther IDs SB-04023 2002 ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING, FONTANA PROPERTY. 7PP MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. NADB-R - 1064023 SB-04207 2004 HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT: FONTANA AUTO MALL OVERLAY ZONE, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 26PP CRM TECHHOGAN, MICHAEL 36-006251, 36-007327, 36-007332, 36-014197, 36-014200, 36-014201, 36-014202, 36-015291, 36-019910, 36-019911, 36-019912, 36-019913 NADB-R - 1064207 SB-04209 2004 A PHASE I CULTURAL RESOURCES INVESTIGATION OF THE FONTANA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL #33 PROJECT AREA IN THE CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA 40PP MCKENNA ET ALMCKENNA, JEANETTE A. NADB-R - 1064209 SB-04548 2005 CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT: LYTLE CREEK APARTMENTS PROJECT SITE, FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 14PP\] BON TERRA CONSULTINGSHEPARD, RICHARDNADB-R - 1064548 SB-04549 2004 CULTURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT: SOMMERVILLE-CONZELMAN/COVENANT PROJECT SITE, APN:0228-021-20, FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 7PP BONTERRASHEPARD, RICHARDNADB-R - 1064549 SB-04554 2004 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES EVALUATION & PALEONTOLOGICAL RECORDS SEARCH FOR THE CHAFFEY HIGH SCHOOL #9 PROJECT, SAN SEVAINE & WALNUT AVE, CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA. 33PP MICHAEL BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES DICE, MICHAEL and MARNIE VIANNA NADB-R - 1064554 SB-04868 2005 CULTURAL RESOURCE RECORDS SEARCH AND SITE VISIT RESULTS FOR SPRINT TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY CANDIDATE SB70XC019C (FIRE STATION) 7110 CITRUS AVENUE, FONTANA, SAN BERNADINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AISLIN-KAY, MARNIENADB-R - 1064868 SB-05063 2005 A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation of the Fontana Unified School District Middle School No. 9, Located in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. McKenna et alMcKenna, Jeanette A.36-015497NADB-R - 1065063 Page 4 of 6 SBAIC 10/11/2023 3:06:02 PM Report List Report No.Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s)ResourcesOther IDs SB-05095 2005 CULTURAL RESOURCE RECORDS SEARCH AND SITE VISIT RESULTS FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY CANDIDATE HORIZON TOWER- FONTANNA, 6498 CATAWBA AVENUE, FONTANNA, SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA BONNER, WAYNE H.NADB-R - 1065095 SB-06392 2008 Addendum Report: Cultural Resources Investigation of the Fontana Unified School District Middle School 8.75 Additional Lots Located in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino Co., California McKENNA et al.McKenna, Jeanette A. SB-06414 2009 Addendum to Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report, Fontana Sports Park Project, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Tang, Bai "Tom"NADB-R - 1066414 SB-06450 2009 Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey Report: Fontana Sports Park Project, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. CRM TechTang, Bai "Tom", Terri Jacquemain, and Daniel Ballester NADB-R - 1066450 SB-06492 2009 Cultural Resource Records Search and Site Visit Results for T-Mobile USA Candidate 1E24756A (Kohler Park), 15352 Walnut Avenue, Fontana, San Bernardino County, California Michael Brandman Associates Bonner, Wayne H. and Arabesque Said SB-06907 2010 Cultural Resources Record Search and Archaeological Survey Results for the proposed Royal Street Communications, California, LLC, Site LA5304A (BTS Koehier Park) located at 15352 Walnut Avenue, Fontana, San Bernardino County, California, 92336 H.E.A.R.T.Bonner, Diane F. and Robert J. Wlodarski SB-06967 2011 PROPOSED WIRELESS DEVICE MONOPOLE AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT; CAUGHLIN SITE, 17235 RACCOON AVENUE, ADELANTO, CALIFORNIA, 92301 Tetra Tech, IncPuckett, Heather R. SB-06986 2010 Phase I Resources Assessment Report for the Falcon Ridge Substation Project in the Cities of Fontana and Rialto, San Bernardino County, California. CogstoneGlover, Amy and Sherri Gust NADB-R - 1066986 Page 5 of 6 SBAIC 10/11/2023 3:06:03 PM Report List Report No.Year Title AffiliationAuthor(s)ResourcesOther IDs SB-08398 2017 Final Class III Cultural Resources Inventory Interconnect Towers LLC Ash Hill Cell Tower Proposed Access Route Project Near the Community of Klondike San Bernardino County, California Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. Yorck, Jesse 36-031732, 36-031733, 36-031734, 36-031735, 36-031736 Page 6 of 6 SBAIC 10/11/2023 3:06:04 PM Primary No.Trinomial Resource List Other IDs ReportsTypeAgeAttribute codes Recorded by P-36-007325 CA-SBR-007325 08-SBd-30-PS-11 AH02; AH03; AH07 1992 (Sutton / Zeller) P-36-009363 CA-SBR-009363H LANDINGS 750 LLC SITE 1; JOHNSON MILLER COMPLEX SB-03172, SB-03173AH02; AH06 1997 (McKenna et al); 2010 (Lindsay Andrews, Southern California Edison) P-36-009364 CA-SBR-009364H LANDINGS 750 LLC SITE 2; S+M BIOCIMA RESIDENTRE COMPLEX SB-03172, SB-03173AH02; AH03; AH04; AH05 1997 (McKenna et al) P-36-009365 CA-SBR-009365H LANDINGS 750 LLC SITE 3; OTTESON PROPERTY SB-03172, SB-03173AH11; AH15; AP02; AP04 1997 (McKenna et al) P-36-009367 CA-SBR-009367H SUMMIT HEIGHTS 4 SB-03174AH051996 (SHEPARD) P-36-015497 Resource Name - Base Line Road; PHI - SBR-012; Other - Baseline Rd SB-04063, SB- 04356, SB-04363, SB-05063, SB- 06654, SB-06812, SB-07187, SB- 07202, SB-07528, SB-07960, SB- 07990, SB-08097, SB-08126, SB-08130 Structure Historic HP37 1973; 2014 (Josh Smallwood, Helix) P-36-019911 Resource Name - CRM Tech 1300-2 SB-04207BuildingHistoricAH15; HP02 2004 (Bai "Tom" Tang & Josh Smallwood, CRM Tech) P-36-019912 Resource Name - CRM Tech 1300-3 SB-04207BuildingHistoricAH15; HP02 2004 (Bai "Tom" Tang, CRM Tech) P-36-019913 Resource Name - CRM Tech 1300-4 SB-04207BuildingHistoricAH15; HP02 2004 (Bai "Tom" Tang, CRM Tech) P-36-020338 Other - Cole Residence; Resource Name - 04.881 - FISD Elementary School No. 31 SB-04262, SB-04263BuildingHistoricHP022004 (Jeanette A. McKenna, McKenna et al.) P-36-020915 Resource Name - CRM Tech 2322-1; Other - 6327 Knox Avenue Building Historic AH15; HP02 2009 (Terri Jacquemain, CRM Tech) P-36-020916 Resource Name - CRM Tech 2322-2; Other - 6335 Cooper Avenue Building Historic AH15; HP02 2009 (Terri Jacquemain, CRM Tech) P-36-020918 Other - 15669 Sierra Lakes Parkway; Resource Name - CRM Tech 2376-2 Building Historic AH15; HP02 2009 (Terri Jacuemain, CRM Tech) Page 1 of 1 SBAIC 10/11/2023 3:06:40 PM From:Nick Bizzell To:fontanahistoricalsociety1906@gmail.com Cc:Sonia Sifuentes Subject:Fontana Walnut Property Project (2023-193) Date:Monday, November 6, 2023 12:04:00 PM Attachments:FHS_HSL_2023_193.pdf Dear Fontana Historical Society, ECORP Consulting, Inc. Has been retained to assist in the planning of the development of the project indicated above. The proposed project consists of 29.65 acres located in the City of Fontana. This Area is located north of Walnut street, on undeveloped land to the west of houses off of Almeria Avenue and east of Skylark avenue, as shown on the attached location map. Any knowledge regarding cultural resources or historic properties that might be affected by this undertaking would be greatly appreciated. Please contact Senior Archaeologist Sonia Sifuentes by email at ssifuentes@ecorpconsulting.com or by phone at (909) 307-0046 with any questions or concerns. Thank you! Nick Bizzell Associate Archaeologist 215 North Fifth Street ● Redlands, CA 92374 ● Tel: (909) 307-0046 ● Fax: (909) 307-0056 ● www.ecorpconsulting.com November 6, 2023 Fontana Historical Society 16830 Spring Street Fontana, CA 92335 Sent via email: Fontanahistoricalsociety1906@gmail.com RE: Cultural Resources Identification Effort for the Fontana Walnut Property Project, San Bernardino County, California Dear Fontana Historical Society: ECORP Consulting, Inc. has been retained to assist in the planning of the development on the project indicated above. The proposed project area consists of approximately 29.65 acres located in the City of Fontana This area is located north of Walnut Street, in undeveloped land to the west of houses off of Almeria Avenue, and east of houses off Skylark Avenue, Caravelle Avenue, Aerostar Court, Northstar Avenue, Northwind Avenue, Southwind Avenue, and Eastwind Avenue, south of homes on either side of Knox Avenue, as shown in the highlighted area on the enclosed map. As part of the identification effort, we are seeking information from all parties that may have knowledge of or concerns with historic properties or cultural resources in the area of potential effect. Included is a map showing the project area outlined. We would appreciate input on this undertaking from the historical society with concerns about possible cultural properties or potential impacts within or adjacent to the area of potential effect. If you have any questions, please contact me at (909) 307-0046 or ssifuentes@ecorpconsulting.com. Thank you in advance for your assistance in our cultural resource management study. Sincerely, Sonia Sifuentes Senior Archaeologist Attachment: Project Location and Vicinity Map Map Date: 9/14/2023 Sources: ESRI, USGS Lo c a t i o n : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ L o c a t i o n _ V i c i n i t y \ L o c a t i o n a n d V i c i n i t y . a p r x - F W P _ L n V ( t r o t e l l i n i - 9 / 1 4 / 2 0 2 3 ) Devore, CA (1996,NAD27) CA 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle US Geological Survey. San Bernardino County, California §#36, T.#01N, R.#06W, SBBM Latitude (NAD83): 34.1311348°N Longitude (NAD83): 117.4618492°W Watershed: Santa Ana (#18070203) I 0 1,000 2,000 S c ale in Feet 2023-193 Fontana Walnut Property Figure 1. Project Location and Vicinity Project Area - 29.650 acres APPENDIX B Sacred Lands File Coordination Map Date: 5/29/2024 Sources: ESRI, USGS Lo c a t i o n : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x - F W P _ R S _ S L F S _ 2 0 2 4 0 5 2 9 ( t r o t e l l i n i - 5 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 ) Devore, CA (1996,NAD27) Fontana, CA (967[p.r.1980],NAD27) CA 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle US Geological Survey. San Bernardino County, California §#36, T.#01N, R.#06W, SBBM Latitude (NAD83): 34.1312037° Longitude (NAD83): -117.4618642° Watershed: Santa Ana (#18070203) I 0 1,000 2,000 Scale in Feet 2023-193 Fontana Walnut Property Records Search Project Site - 30.36 ac. STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION Page 1 of 1 June 10, 2024 Michael M. DeGiovine ECORP Consulting, Inc Via Email to: mdegiovine@ecorpconsulting.com Re: Fontana Walnut Project, San Bernardino County To Whom It May Concern: A record search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) was completed for the information submitted for the above referenced project. The results were positive. Please contact the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation on the attached list for information. Please note that tribes do not always record their sacred sites in the SLF, nor are they required to do so. A SLF search is not a substitute for consultation with tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with a project’s geographic area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites, such as the appropriate regional California Historical Research Information System (CHRIS) archaeological Information Center for the presence of recorded archaeological sites. Attached is a list of Native American tribes who may also have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse impact within the proposed project area. Please contact all of those listed; if they cannot supply information, they may recommend others with specific knowledge. By contacting all those listed, your organization will be better able to respond to claims of failure to consult with the appropriate tribe. If a response has not been received within two weeks of notification, the Commission requests that you follow-up with a telephone call or email to ensure that the project information has been received. If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify the NAHC. With your assistance, we can assure that our lists contain current information. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address: Murphy.Donahue@NAHC.ca.gov Sincerely, Murphy Donahue Cultural Resources Analyst Attachment CHAIRPERSON Reginald Pagaling Chumash VICE-CHAIRPERSON Buffy McQuillen Yokayo Pomo, Yuki, Nomlaki SECRETARY Sara Dutschke Miwok PARLIAMENTARIAN Wayne Nelson Luiseño COMMISSIONER Isaac Bojorquez Ohlone-Costanoan COMMISSIONER Stanley Rodriguez Kumeyaay COMMISSIONER Laurena Bolden Serrano COMMISSIONER Reid Milanovich Cahuilla COMMISSIONER Bennae Calac Pauma-Yuima Band of Luiseño Indians EXECUTIVE SECRETARY Raymond C. Hitchcock Miwok, Nisenan NAHC HEADQUARTERS 1550 Harbor Boulevard Suite 100 West Sacramento, California 95691 (916) 373-3710 nahc@nahc.ca.gov NAHC.ca.gov County Tribe Name Fed (F) Non-Fed (N) Contact Person Contact Address Phone #Fax #Email Address Cultural Affiliation Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians F Lacy Padilla, Director of Historic Preservation/THPO 5401 Dinah Shore Drive Palm Springs, CA, 92264 (760) 333-5222 (760) 699-6919 ACBCI-THPO@aguacaliente.net Cahuilla Cahuilla Band of Indians F Erica Schenk, Chairperson 52701 CA Highway 371 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 590-0942 (951) 763-2808 chair@cahuilla-nsn.gov Cahuilla Cahuilla Band of Indians F BobbyRay Esaprza, Cultural Director 52701 CA Highway 371 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 763-5549 besparza@cahuilla-nsn.gov Cahuilla Cahuilla Band of Indians F Anthony Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 52701 CA Highway 371 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 763-5549 anthonymad2002@gmail.com Cahuilla Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation N Andrew Salas, Chairperson P.O. Box 393 Covina, CA, 91723 (844) 390-0787 admin@gabrielenoindians.org Gabrieleno Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation N Christina Swindall Martinez, Secretary P.O. Box 393 Covina, CA, 91723 (844) 390-0787 admin@gabrielenoindians.org Gabrieleno Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians N Anthony Morales, Chairperson P.O. Box 693 San Gabriel, CA, 91778 (626) 483-3564 (626) 286-1262 GTTribalcouncil@aol.com Gabrieleno Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council N Christina Conley, Cultural Resource Administrator P.O. Box 941078 Simi Valley, CA, 93094 (626) 407-8761 christina.marsden@alumni.usc.ed u Gabrielino Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council N Robert Dorame, Chairperson P.O. Box 490 Bellflower, CA, 90707 (562) 761-6417 (562) 761-6417 gtongva@gmail.com Gabrielino Gabrielino/Tongva Nation N Sandonne Goad, Chairperson 106 1/2 Judge John Aiso St., #231 Los Angeles, CA, 90012 (951) 807-0479 sgoad@gabrielino-tongva.com Gabrielino Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List San Bernardino County 6/10/2024 Counties Last Updated San Bernardino Imperial,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 1/11/2024 Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 2/1/2024 Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 6/28/2023 Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 6/28/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura 8/18/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura 8/18/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura 12/4/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura 3/16/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura 3/16/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura 3/28/2023 06/10/2024 09:30 AM 1 of 4 Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List San Bernardino County 6/10/2024 Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe N Sam Dunlap, Cultural Resource Director P.O. Box 3919 Seal Beach, CA, 90740 (909) 262-9351 tongvatcr@gmail.com Gabrielino Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe N Charles Alvarez, Chairperson 23454 Vanowen Street West Hills, CA, 91307 (310) 403-6048 Chavez1956metro@gmail.com Gabrielino Morongo Band of Mission Indians F Robert Martin, Chairperson 12700 Pumarra Road Banning, CA, 92220 (951) 755-5110 (951) 755-5177 abrierty@morongo-nsn.gov Cahuilla Serrano Morongo Band of Mission Indians F Ann Brierty, THPO 12700 Pumarra Road Banning, CA, 92220 (951) 755-5259 (951) 572-6004 abrierty@morongo-nsn.gov Cahuilla Serrano Pala Band of Mission Indians F Christopher Nejo, Legal Analyst/Researcher PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Road Pala, CA, 92059 (760) 891-3564 cnejo@palatribe.com Cupeno Luiseno Pala Band of Mission Indians F Alexis Wallick, Assistant THPO PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Road Pala, CA, 92059 (760) 891-3537 awallick@palatribe.com Cupeno Luiseno Pala Band of Mission Indians F Shasta Gaughen, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer PMB 50, 35008 Pala Temecula Road Pala, CA, 92059 (760) 891-3515 sgaughen@palatribe.com Cupeno Luiseno Pechanga Band of Indians F Tuba Ebru Ozdil, Pechanga Cultural Analyst P.O. Box 2183 Temecula, CA, 92593 (951) 770-6313 (951) 695-1778 eozdil@pechanga-nsn.gov Luiseno Pechanga Band of Indians F Steve Bodmer, General Counsel for Pechanga Band of Indians P.O. Box 1477 Temecula, CA, 92593 (951) 770-6171 (951) 695-1778 sbodmer@pechanga-nsn.gov Luiseno Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation F Jordan Joaquin, President, Quechan Tribal Council P.O.Box 1899 Yuma, AZ, 85366 (760) 919-3600 executivesecretary@quechantribe .com Quechan Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura 5/30/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,Santa Barbara,Ventura 5/30/2023 Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 11/27/2023 Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 11/27/2023 Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 11/27/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura 8/2/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura 8/2/2023 Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 5/16/2023 06/10/2024 09:30 AM 2 of 4 Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List San Bernardino County 6/10/2024 Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation F Manfred Scott, Acting Chairman - Kw'ts'an Cultural Committee P.O. Box 1899 Yuma, AZ, 85366 (928) 210-8739 culturalcommittee@quechantribe. com Quechan Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation F Jill McCormick, Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 1899 Yuma, AZ, 85366 (928) 261-0254 historicpreservation@quechantrib e.com Quechan Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians F Denise Turner Walsh, Attorney General One Government Center Lane Valley Center, CA, 92082 (760) 689-5727 dwalsh@rincon-nsn.gov Luiseno Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians F Joseph Linton, Tribal Council/Culture Committee Member One Government Center Lane Valley Center, CA, 92082 (760) 803-3548 jlinton@rincon-nsn.gov Luiseno Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians F Cheryl Madrigal, Cultural Resources Manager/Tribal Historic Preservation Officer One Government Center Lane Valley Center, CA, 92082 (760) 648-3000 cmadrigal@rincon-nsn.gov Luiseno Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians F Laurie Gonzalez, Tribal Council/Culture Committee Member One Government Center Lane Valley Center, CA, 92082 (760) 484-4835 lgonzalez@rincon-nsn.gov Luiseno San Manuel Band of Mission Indians F Alexandra McCleary, Senior Manager of Cultural Resources Management 26569 Community Center Drive Highland, CA, 92346 (909) 633-0054 alexandra.mccleary@sanmanuel- nsn.gov Serrano Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians F Steven Estrada, Tribal Chairman P.O. Box 391820 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 659-2700 (951) 659-2228 sestrada@santarosa-nsn.gov Cahuilla Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians F Vanessa Minott, Tribal Administrator P.O. Box 391820 Anza, CA, 92539 (951) 659-2700 (951) 659-2228 vminott@santarosa-nsn.gov Cahuilla Serrano Nation of Mission Indians N Wayne Walker, Co-Chairperson P. O. Box 343 Patton, CA, 92369 (253) 370-0167 serranonation1@gmail.com Serrano Serrano Nation of Mission Indians N Mark Cochrane, Co-Chairperson P. O. Box 343 Patton, CA, 92369 (909) 578-2598 serranonation1@gmail.com Serrano Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 5/16/2023 Imperial,Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 5/16/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura 7/7/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura 5/31/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura 5/31/2023 Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego,Santa Barbara,Ventura 5/31/2023 Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino 1/16/2024 Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 4/8/2024 Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 4/8/2024 Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino 10/10/2023 Kern,Los Angeles,Riverside,San Bernardino 10/10/2023 06/10/2024 09:30 AM 3 of 4 Native American Heritage Commission Native American Contact List San Bernardino County 6/10/2024 Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581 (951) 654-5544 (951) 654-4198 ivivanco@soboba-nsn.com Cahuilla Luiseno Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Joseph Ontiveros, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581 (951) 663-5279 (951) 654-4198 jontiveros@soboba-nsn.gov Cahuilla Luiseno Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians F Jessica Valdez, Cultural Resource Specialist P.O. Box 487 San Jacinto, CA, 92581 (951) 663-6261 (951) 654-4198 jvaldez@soboba-nsn.gov Cahuilla Luiseno Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 7/14/2023 This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resource Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources assessment for the proposed Fontana Walnut Project, San Bernardino County. Record: PROJ- 2024-002956 Report Type: List of Tribes Counties: San Bernardino NAHC Group: All Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 7/14/2023 Imperial,Los Angeles,Orange,Riverside,San Bernardino,San Diego 7/14/2023 06/10/2024 09:30 AM 4 of 4 APPENDIX C Project Area Photographs Page 1 of 1 DPR 523i (9/2013) State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PHOTOGRAPH RECORD Trinomial Camera Format: iPhone 12 Project Name: Fontana Walnut Year 2023 Lens Size: 26mm Film Type and Speed: digital Negatives Kept at: Mo. Day Time Exp./Frame Subject/Description View Toward Accession # Oct 19 IMG-0511 Project area overview, south end, Knox Avenue. South IMG-0511 Oct 19 IMG-0512 Modern Trailer, northwest part of Project Area Northwest IMG-0512 Oct 19 IMG-0516 Project Overview from northwest corner Southeast IMG-0516 Oct 19 IMG-0517 Surface visibility in Project Area South IMG-0517 Oct 19 IMG-0519 Project Overview, southeast corner Northwest IMG-0519 Oct 19 IMG-0520 Rocky tilled area in south part of Project Area East IMG-0520 Oct 23 IMG-0521 FW-01., feature 1 overview South IMG-0521 Oct 23 IMG-0522 FW-01, feature 1 pipes in foundation East IMG-0522 Oct 23 IMG-0523 FW-01 feature 1 overview North IMG-0523 Oct 23 IMG-0524 FW-03 overview West IMG-0524 Oct 23 IMG-0525 FW-03 overview East IMG-0525 Oct 23 IMG-0526 FW-01 feature 2 overview South IMG-0526 Oct 23 IMG-0527 FW-01 feature 2 overview North IMG-0527 Oct 23 IMG-0528 FW-02 overview South IMG-0528 Oct 23 IMG-0529 FW-02 northern foundation West IMG-0529 Oct 23 IMG-0530 FW-02 southern foundation South IMG-0530 Oct 23 IMG-0531 FW-02 overview North IMG-0531 Oct 23 IMG-0532 FW-04 overview South IMG-0532 Oct 23 IMG-0533 FW-04 concrete boundary Southeast IMG-0533 Oct 23 IMG-0534 FW-04 overview North IMG-0534 Oct 23 IMG-0535 Project Area overview from northeast corner Southwest IMG-0535 Oct 23 IMG-0536 Project Area overview from southeast corner Northwest IMG-0536 Page 1 of 1 Project Name: Fontana Walnut 2023-193 Year 2024 DPR 523i (9/2013) State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PHOTOGRAPH RECORD Trinomial Camera Format: Samsung Galaxy A50, SM-A505U Lens Size: 26 mm Film Type and Speed: Digital 25 megapixel Negatives Kept at: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 N. Fifth Street Redlands, CA 92374 Mo. Day Time Exp./Frame Subject/Description View Toward Accession # May 14 8:54 1 Additional survey area overview from NE corner Southwest 20240514_085451 May 14 8:57 2 Additional survey area overview from NW corner Southeast 20240514_085724 May 14 9:00 3 Typical ground cover, western parcel East 20240514_090012 May 14 9:00 4 Additional Survey area overview from SW corner Northwest 20240514_090014 May 14 9:02 5 Typical ground cover, southeastern parcel West 20240514_090220 May 14 9:21 6 FW-2 overview Northwest 20240514_092107 May 14 9:21 7 FW-2 Feature 1. Northwest 20240514_092128 May 14 9:21 8 FW-2 Feature 1 close up of side treatment North 20240514_092140 May 14 9:22 9 FW-2 Feature 1 close up of surface Plan 20240514_092213 May 14 9:22 10 FW-2 Feature 1 with rubble East 20240514_092229 May 14 9:22 11 FW-2 Feature 2 North 20240514_092245 May 14 9:22 12 FW-2 Feature 2 detail indicating former tiles Plan 20240514_092252 May 14 9:23 13 FW-2 Feature 2, eastern edge with cinder block West 20240514_092317 May 14 9:30 14 FW-1 Feature 3, walkway mostly buried. West 20240514_093056 May 14 9:37 15 Asphalt rectangle of FW-1. (Feature 4? Modern?) North 20240514_093703 May 14 9:37 16 FW-1 site overview East 20240514_093733 May 14 9:41 17 FW-4 site overview Northeast 20240514_094123 May 14 9:44 18 FW-4 Feature 1 foundation South 20240514_094447 May 14 0945 19 FW-4 Feature 1 foundation North 20240514_094514 May 14 9:35 20 FW-4 Features 2 and 3. South 20240514_094540 APPENDIX D Confidential Cultural Resource Site Locations and Site Records This Appendix contains information on the specific location of cultural resources. This information is not for publication or release to the general public. It is for planning, management and research purposes only. Information on the specific location of pre-contact and historic sites is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act and California Public Records Act. Gulfstream Av e Rockwell Ave K n o x A v e Aerostar Ct Carave lle Ave Sky lark Av e Northst ar A v e Northwind Ave S Highland Av e Wal nut A ve Athena Dr T a i l w i n d L n South wind A v e H e l e n W a y L i s a D r A b i g a i l L n Eastw ind Ave S Highland Ave A l m e r i a S t C a t a w b a A v e A thena Dr J e s s i c a P l A l m e r i a S t C a t a w b a D r C a t a w b a A v e FW-2 FW-4 FW-1 FW-3 County of San Bernardino, Maxar, Microsoft, Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Fontana, County of San Bernardino, California State Parks, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS Map Date: 5/21/2024 Sources: Esri Imagery, Maxar (2023) Lo c a t i o n : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x - F W P C u l t u r a l O v e r v i e w 2 0 2 4 0 5 2 1 ( k e d w a r d s - 5 / 2 1 / 2 0 2 4 ) Map Contents Project Area - 30.37 ac. Cultural Site Boundaries I 0 300 F e et 2023-193 Diversified Pacific - Fontana Walnut Property Appendix D. Resource Overview Map DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 8 *Resource Name or #: FW-1 P1. Other Identifier: FW-1 *P2. Location: ☒ Not for Publication ☐ Unrestricted *a. County: San Bernardino and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5’ Quad: Devore, CA Date: 1996 T01N; R06W;SW ¼ of NE ¼ of Section 36 S.B.B.M. c. Address: 6691 Knox Avenue City: Fontana Zip: 92335 d. UTM: 11S 457455mE/3776906mN NAD83 e. Other Locational Data: From the intersection of Sierra Avenue and South Highland Avenue, turn left and go west on South Highland Avenue for 1.51 miles to the intersection of South Highland Avenue and Knox Boulevard. Turn left and go south on Knox Boulevard for 0.13 mile to where the pavement on Knox Boulevard ends. From this point, the resource is 127 feet to the southeast. Elevation: 1,462 feet above mean sea level. *P3a. Description: This historic-period site is composed of three features- F1, F2, and F3. F1 is a small concrete house foundation to the north and associated concrete driveway to the south. There are remains of laminate tile in the foundation. The house foundation measures 33 feet by 50 feet. The driveway foundation measures 16 feet by 66 feet. There are fragments of red ceramic tile and roof shingles in the surrounding debris. F2 is an L-shaped concrete house foundation. It measures 50 feet by 132 feet. There are remains of ceramic tile in the northern part of the foundation. F3 is a sidewalk, almost completely buried, which connects the western edge of Feature 2 to the northern edge of Feature 1, and then runs to Knox Avenue. There are several mesquite trees surrounding the immediate area. Aerial photographs indicate these structures were absent as recently as 1948 but had been constructed by 1959. Feature 3 was not present in the 1959 aerial photograph, but had been built by 1966. *P3b. Resource Attributes: AH2. Foundations/structure pads. *P4. Resources Present: ☐ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☒ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: Foundation remnants of Feature 1 (photo no. 0523 View north, 10/23/2023 *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: ☒ Historic ☐ Prehistoric ☐ Both *P7. Owner and Address: Fontana Unified School District 9680 Citrus Ave Fontana, CA 92335-5571 *P8. Recorded by: Casey LeJune ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North 5th Street Redlands, CA 92374 *P9. Date Recorded: 10/23/2023 *P10. Survey Type: Intensive pedestrian *P11. Report Citation: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2024. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Walnut Property Project, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for Diversified Pacific. *Attachments: ☐ NONE ☒ Location Map ☒ Sketch Map ☒ Continuation Sheet ☐ Building, Structure, and Object Record ☒ Archaeological Record ☐ District Record ☐ Linear Feature Record ☐ Milling Station Record ☐ Rock Art Record ☐ Artifact Record ☐ Photograph Record ☐ Other (List): State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Trinomial ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORD Page 2 of 8 *Resource Name or #: FW-1 *A1. Dimensions: a. Length: 85 m. (E-W) × b. Width: 47 m. (N-S) Method of Measurement: Paced Taped Visual estimate Other: GPS Method of Determination (Check any that apply.): Artifacts Features Soil Vegetation Topography Cut bank Animal burrow Excavation Property boundary Other (Explain): Reliability of Determination: High Medium Low Explain: Foundations readily visible in mown weeds. Limitations (Check any that apply): Restricted access Paved/built over Site limits incompletely defined Disturbances Vegetation Other (Explain): Well-mowed, but some vegetation obscures the soil surface. A2. Depth: None Unknown Method of Determination: Surface survey only *A3. Human Remains: Present Absent Possible Unknown (Explain): Surface survey only. Remains unlikely due to type of resource present. *A4. Features (Number, briefly describe, indicate size, list associated cultural constituents, and show location of each feature on sketch map.): F1 is an irregularly-shaped house and driveway foundation. The house foundation measures 33 feet east to west by 50 feet north to south. The south and east sides of this foundation form approximate right angles, while the northwest boundary is irregular. The house was not present in aerial photographs from 1948, but is present in aerial photographs from 1959. The driveway was not present in aerial photographs from 1966, but is present in aerial photographs from 1980 F2 is an L-shaped foundation of heavily cracked concrete measuring 50 feet east to west by 132 feet north to south. Feature 2 was not present in aerial photographs from 1948, but is present in aerial photographs from 1959, and was also a structure. F3 is a mostly buried sidewalk measuring three feet north to south by 147 feet east to west. It connects the west side of Feature 2 to the north side of Feature 1, and extends to the former Knox Avenue roadway, where it adjoins a modern rectangular asphalt foundation. Feature 3 was not present in aerial photographs from 1959, but is present in aerial photographs from 1966. The asphalt rectangle it attaches to is not visible in aerial photographs from 1980, and is therefore modern. *A5. Cultural Constituents (Describe and quantify artifacts, ecofacts, cultural residues, etc., not associated with features.): Surrounding Feature 1 are thick red ceramic roofing tiles. Attached to the northern part of Feature 1 are ceramic floor tiles. *A6. Were Specimens Collected? No Yes (If yes, attach Artifact Record or catalog and identify where specimens are curated.) *A7. Site Condition: Good Fair Poor (Describe disturbances.): mowing of vegetation noted. *A8. Nearest Water (Type, distance, and direction.): Etiwanda Creek, 2.6 miles northwest of resource. *A9. Elevation: 1462 Feet above mean sea level (AMSL) A10. Environmental Setting (Describe culturally relevant variables such as vegetation, fauna, soils, geology, landform, slope, aspect, exposure, etc.): Site is located on a gently-sloped southwest facing floodplain. A11. Historical Information: *A12. Age: Prehistoric Protohistoric 1542-1769 1769-1848 1848-1880 1880-1914 1914-1945 Post 1945 Undetermined Describe position in regional prehistoric chronology or factual historic dates if known: Aerial photogaphs do not show these structures in 1948. They first appear in aerial photographs in 1959. A13. Interpretations (Discuss data potential, function[s], ethnic affiliation, and other interpretations): This is the remaining foundation from one of several structures built between 1948 and 1959, and then demolished between 1980 and 2009 (NETRONLINE n.d.). A14. Remarks: A15. References (Documents, informants, maps, and other references): NETRONLINE. n.d. Historic Aerials map viewer. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. Accessed May 6, 2024. A16. Photographs (List subjects, direction of view, and accession numbers or attach a Photograph Record.): Original Media/Negatives Kept at: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North Fifth Street. Redlands, CA 92374 *A17. Form Prepared by: Steve Wintergerst Date: May 6, 2024 Affiliation and Address: Ecorp Consulting, Inc. 215 North Fifth Street. Redlands, CA 92374 DPR 523C (1/95) *Required information State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 3 of 8 *Resource Name or # FW-1 *Recorded by: Casey Lejeune *Date: October 23, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View south, FW-1, feature 1. October 23, 2023. Plan view. FW-1, pipes in feature 1. October 23, 2023. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 4 of 8 *Resource Name or # FW-1 *Recorded by:Casey Lejeune *Date: October 23, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View south, FW-1, feature 2. October 23, 2023. View north FW-1, feature 2. October 23, 2023. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 5 of 8 *Resource Name or # FW-1 *Recorded by: Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View west, FW-1, feature 3. May 14, 2024. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 6 of 8 *Resource Name or # FW-1 *Recorded by: Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update Resource FW-1 represents the remains of former residential structures that date to the 20th century. Archival research could not associate this resource with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our local, regional, state, or national history (NRHP/CRHR Criterion A/1). The owner(s) could not be identified as a person(s) of significance or importance to the local, state, or national past (NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2). The resource represents the remains of a former residence and therefore lacks any design characteristics unique to itself; as such, it does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic values; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction (NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3). The resource lacks any surface artifacts or evidence of subsurface deposits that could provide data to address questions regarding social status or participation in the larger economy. The data potential of this resource has been exhausted by its recording and archival research; as such, it does not have the potential to yield information important to the local, state, or national history or prehistory (NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4). In sum, FW-1 does not contribute to any known or suspected historic districts and is not considered a Historic Property for the purpose of NHPA Section 106, nor a Historical Resource under CEQA. DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information FW-1 EC O R P : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x / F W P F W - 1 D P R L o c a t i o n 2 0 2 3 1 1 2 1 - k e d w a r d s 1 1 / 2 1 / 2 0 2 3 DPR 523J (1/95)*Required Information 0 500 1,000250 Meters 0 2,000 4,0001,000 FeetI 1:24,000*Scale: *Date of Map: 1996 *Resource Name or #: FW-1Page 7 of 8 *Map Name: Devore, CA Primary # HRI # Trinomial State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION LOCATION MAP Feature 3 Feature 1 Feature 2 *Resource Name or #: FW-1Page 8 of 8 *Drawn By: Steve Wintergerst *Date: 05/14/2024 State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SKETCH MAP Primary # HRI # Trinomial DPR 523K (1/95)*Required Information Legend Site Boundary Cultural Resources Cultural Line Resource Knox Ave Dirt Road Lo c a t i o n : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x - F W P D P R S k e t c h F W - 1 2 0 2 4 0 5 2 2 ( k e d w a r d s - 5 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 4 ) 0 157.5 Meters I 0 5025 Feet DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 10 *Resource Name or #: FW-2 P1. Other Identifier: FW-2 *P2. Location: ☒ Not for Publication ☐ Unrestricted *a. County: San Bernardino and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Devore, CA Date: 1996 T01N; R06W; SW ¼ of NW ¼ of Section 36 S.B.B.M. c. Address: 6679 Almeria Street City: Fontana Zip: 92335 d. UTM: 11S 457491mE/3776957mN NAD 83 e. Other Locational Data: From the City of Fontana Civic Center, go north on Sierra Highway for 2.12 miles to the intersection of Sierra Highway and South Highland Avenue. Turn left and go west on South Highland Avenue for 1.51 miles to the intersection of South Highland Avenue and Knox Boulevard. Turn left and go south on Knox Boulevard for 0.13 mile to where the pavement on Knox Boulevard ends. From this point, the resource is 223 feet east of Knox Avenue. Elevation: 1,471 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). *P3a. Description: FW-2 is a historic-period site consisting of two features from a single-family residence constructed in 1952. Both are small concrete foundations. Feature 1 is roughly rectangular, measuring 17 feet by 24 feet is built on two levels, with a 17 feet by 17 feet section on the west set 2 feet above current ground level, and a 7 feet east to west by 11 feet north to south section built level with the ground, and attached to the east side of the pad so that the sections line up on the southern edge. Feature 1 has an exterior side treatment of concrete with chicken wire, painted over with a layer of purple paint covered by tan paint. Steel threaded bolts with hexagonal nuts protrude from the edge of this pad, and in some places hold rotting 2 inch x 6inch lumber to the edge of the pad. Feature 1 has large pieces of cinderblock and concrete, suggesting a larger structure may have been destroyed. Feature 2 is to the north of Feature 1 and measures 10 feet square. It is constructed in the same way as Feature 1 but lacks the purple paint. *P3b. Resource Attributes: AH2. Foundations/structure pads *P4. Resources Present: ☐ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☒ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: Photo no. 0528, overview View south, 10/23/2023 *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: ☒ Historic ☐ Prehistoric ☐ Both 1952 (RealQuest) *P7. Owner and Address: Fontana Unified School District 9680 Citrus Ave Fontana, CA 92335-5571 *P8. Recorded by: Casey LeJeune ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North 5th Street Redlands, CA 92374 *P9. Date Recorded: 10/23/2023 *P10. Survey Type: Intensive *P11. Report Citation: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2024. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Walnut Property Project, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for Diversified Pacific. *Attachments: ☐ NONE ☒ Location Map ☒ Sketch Map ☒ Continuation Sheet ☐ Building, Structure, and Object Record ☒ Archaeological Record ☐ District Record ☐ Linear Feature Record ☐ Milling Station Record ☐ Rock Art Record ☐ Artifact Record ☐ Photograph Record ☒ Other (List): State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Trinomial ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORD Page 2 of 10 *Resource Name or #: FW-2 *A1. Dimensions: a. Length: 14 m. (N-S) × b. Width: 5 m. (E-W) Method of Measurement: Paced Taped Visual estimate Other: GPS Method of Determination (Check any that apply.): Artifacts Features Soil Vegetation Topography Cut bank Animal burrow Excavation Property boundary Other (Explain): Reliability of Determination: High Medium Low Explain: Foundations readily visible in mown weeds. Limitations (Check any that apply): Restricted access Paved/built over Site limits incompletely defined Disturbances Vegetation Other (Explain): Well-mowed, but some vegetation obscures the soil surface. A2. Depth: None Unknown Method of Determination: Surface survey only *A3. Human Remains: Present Absent Possible Unknown (Explain): Surface survey only. Remains unlikely due to type of resource present. *A4. Features (Number, briefly describe, indicate size, list associated cultural constituents, and show location of each feature on sketch map.): Feature 1: Concrete foundation, 17 ft N-S by 24 ft E-W consisting of two parts: western portion is a 17x17 foot square foundation extending 2 feet above ground level. The eastern portion is a 11 foot by 7 foot concrete pad at ground level. The exterior of this feature was painted purple, and then an exterior of tan latex paint. Concrete and cinderblock covers the northern portions of this feature. There are boards with round-headed nails attached to it. Feature 2: Conbcrete pad measuring 10 feet north to south by 10 feet east to west, extending to 2 feet above ground surface. Grid markings on the surface of F2 indicate it was once covered with tiles. The exterior of this feature was painted with tan latex paint. This foundation has protruding metal hardware. Both features include a one-inch-thick treatment of concrete and chicken wire along the exterior sides, and 0.25-inch threaded metal bolts with nuts attached to them set approximately every 4 feet around the exterior. Rotting 2x6 boards are still attached to these foundations by the bolts in some places. *A5. Cultural Constituents (Describe and quantify artifacts, ecofacts, cultural residues, etc., not associated with features.): None. *A6. Were Specimens Collected? No Yes (If yes, attach Artifact Record or catalog and identify where specimens are curated.) *A7. Site Condition: Good Fair Poor (Describe disturbances.): The structures have been demolished. To the north is modern refuse and dirt roads. *A8. Nearest Water (Type, distance, and direction.): Etiwanda Creek, 2.6 miles northwest of resource. *A9. Elevation: 1,471 Feet above mean sea level (AMSL) A10. Environmental Setting (Describe culturally relevant variables such as vegetation, fauna, soils, geology, landform, slope, aspect, exposure, etc.): Site is located on a gently-sloped southwest-facing floodplain. A11. Historical Information: *A12. Age: Prehistoric Protohistoric 1542-1769 1769-1848 1848-1880 1880-1914 1914-1945 Post 1945 Undetermined Describe position in regional prehistoric chronology or factual historic dates if known: Realquest data indicates that a structure was built here in 1952. A13. Interpretations (Discuss data potential, function[s], ethnic affiliation, and other interpretations): This is the remaining foundation from 1952 and then demolished between 1980 and 2009 (based on historic aerial photographs). A14. Remarks: A15. References (Documents, informants, maps, and other references): NETRONLINE. n.d. Historic Aerials map viewer. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. Accessed May 6, 2024. A16. Photographs (List subjects, direction of view, and accession numbers or attach a Photograph Record.): Original Media/Negatives Kept at: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North Fifth Street. Redlands, CA 92374 *A17. Form Prepared by: Steve Wintergerst Date: May 6, 2024 Affiliation and Address: Ecorp Consulting, Inc. 215 North Fifth Street. Redlands, CA 92374 DPR 523C (1/95) *Required information State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 3 of 10 *Resource Name or # FW-2 *Recorded by:Casey Lejeune *Date: October 23, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View west. FW-2, north foundation October 23, 2023. View south FW-2, south foundation October 23, 2023. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 4 of 10 *Resource Name or # FW- 2 *Recorded by: Casey Lejeune and Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View north. FW-2, overview. October 23, 2023. View Northwest. FW-2 overview. May 14, 2024. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 5 of 10 *Resource Name or # FW- 2 *Recorded by: Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View north. FW-2, Feature 1. May 14, 2024. Plan view. FW-2 Feature 1, side treatment. May 14, 2024. Plan view FW-2 Feature 1, surface. May 14, 2024. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 6 of 10 *Resource Name or # FW- 2 *Recorded by: Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View east. FW-2, Feature 1 with rubble. May 14, 2024. View north. FW-2 Feature 2. May 14, 2024. Plan view FW-2 Feature 1, surface indicating former tiles. May 14, 2024. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 7 of 10 *Resource Name or # FW- 2 *Recorded by: Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 8 of 10 *Resource Name or # FW- 2 *Recorded by: Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update Resource FW-2 represents the remains of former residential structures that date to the 20th century. Archival research could not associate this resource with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our local, regional, state, or national history (NRHP/CRHR Criterion A/1). The owner(s) could not be identified as a person(s) of significance or importance to the local, state, or national past (NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2). The resource represents the remains of a former residence and therefore lacks any design characteristics unique to itself; as such, it does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic values; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction (NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3). The resource lacks any surface artifacts or evidence of subsurface deposits that could provide data to address questions regarding social status or participation in the larger economy. The data potential of this resource has been exhausted by its recording and archival research; as such, it does not have the potential to yield information important to the local, state, or national history or prehistory (NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4). In sum, FW-2 does not contribute to any known or suspected historic districts and is not considered a Historic Property for the purpose of NHPA Section 106, nor a Historical Resource under CEQA. DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information FW-2 EC O R P : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x / F W P F W - 2 D P R L o c a t i o n 2 0 2 3 1 1 2 1 - k e d w a r d s 1 1 / 2 1 / 2 0 2 3 DPR 523J (1/95)*Required Information 0 500 1,000250 Meters 0 2,000 4,0001,000 FeetI 1:24,000*Scale: *Date of Map: 1996 *Resource Name or #: FW-2Page 9 of 10 *Map Name: Devore, CA Primary # HRI # Trinomial State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION LOCATION MAP Feature 1 Feature 2 *Resource Name or #: FW-2Page 10 of 10 *Drawn By: Steve Wintergerst *Date: 05/14/2024 State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SKETCH MAP Primary # HRI # Trinomial DPR 523K (1/95)*Required Information Legend Site Boundary Cultural Resources Dirt Road Lo c a t i o n : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x - F W P D P R S k e t c h F W - 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 5 2 2 ( k e d w a r d s - 5 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 4 ) 0 157.5 Meters I 0 5025 Feet DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 6 *Resource Name or #: FW-3 P1. Other Identifier: FW-3 *P2. Location: ☒ Not for Publication ☐ Unrestricted *a. County: San Bernardino and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Devore, CA Date: 1996 T01N; R06W; Section 36 S.B.B.M. c. Address: 6727 Knox Avenue City: Fontana Zip: 92335 d. UTM: 11S 457470mE/3776862mN NAD 83 e. Other Locational Data: From the intersection of Sierra Avenue and South Highland Avenue, turn left and go west on South Highland Avenue for 1.51 miles to the intersection of South Highland Avenue and Knox Boulevard. Turn left and go south on Knox Boulevard for 0.13 mile to where the pavement on Knox Boulevard ends. From this point, the resource is 331 feet southeast of the paved end of Knox Boulevard. Elevation: 1,461 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). *P3a. Description: FW-3 is a historic-period site consisting of a concrete foundation and debris pile. The foundation is cracked, weathered and overgrown. A pile of granite rocks and chunks of modern concrete are to the immediate east of the foundation. The foundation is rectangular in shape and measures 17 feet by 50 feet. Aerial photographs indicate this structure had not been built in 1948 but was present in aerial photographs taken in 1959. *P3b. Resource Attributes: AH2. Foundations/structure pads. *P4. Resources Present: ☐ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☒ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: Site overview, photo # 0524 View west, 10/23/2023 *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: ☒ Historic ☐ Prehistoric ☐ Both *P7. Owner and Address: Fontana Unified School District 9680 Citrus Ave Fontana, CA 92335-5571 *P8. Recorded by: Casey LeJeune ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North 5th Street Redlands, CA 92374 *P9. Date Recorded: 10/23/2023 *P10. Survey Type: Intensive *P11. Report Citation: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2024. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Walnut Property Project, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for Diversified Pacific. *Attachments: ☐ NONE ☒ Location Map ☒ Sketch Map ☐ Continuation Sheet ☐ Building, Structure, and Object Record ☒ Archaeological Record ☐ District Record ☐ Linear Feature Record ☐ Milling Station Record ☐ Rock Art Record ☐ Artifact Record ☐ Photograph Record ☐ Other (List): State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Trinomial ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORD Page 2 of 6 *Resource Name or #: FW-3 *A1. Dimensions: a. Length: 10 m. (E-W) × b. Width: 5 m. (N-S) Method of Measurement: Paced Taped Visual estimate Other: GPS Method of Determination (Check any that apply.): Artifacts Features Soil Vegetation Topography Cut bank Animal burrow Excavation Property boundary Other (Explain): Reliability of Determination: High Medium Low Explain: Foundations readily visible in mown weeds. Limitations (Check any that apply): Restricted access Paved/built over Site limits incompletely defined Disturbances Vegetation Other (Explain): Well-mowed, but some vegetation obscures the soil surface. To the east of this resource is a large pile of granite boulders and concrete chunks, likely deposited by heavy machinery. A2. Depth: None Unknown Method of Determination: Surface survey only *A3. Human Remains: Present Absent Possible Unknown (Explain): Surface survey only. Remains unlikely due to type of resource present. *A4. Features (Number, briefly describe, indicate size, list associated cultural constituents, and show location of each feature on sketch map.): One cracked irregularly-shaped concrete foundation measuring 17 feet north to south by 50 feet east to west. *A5. Cultural Constituents (Describe and quantify artifacts, ecofacts, cultural residues, etc., not associated with features.): none *A6. Were Specimens Collected? No Yes (If yes, attach Artifact Record or catalog and identify where specimens are curated.) *A7. Site Condition: Good Fair Poor (Describe disturbances.): Structure has been demolished. Remaining foundation is cracked and overgrown. Modern trash and construction debris is near the site. *A8. Nearest Water (Type, distance, and direction.): Etiwanda Creek, 2.6 miles northwest of resource. *A9. Elevation: 1,461 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) A10. Environmental Setting (Describe culturally relevant variables such as vegetation, fauna, soils, geology, landform, slope, aspect, exposure, etc.): Site is located on a gently-sloped southwest-facing floodplain. A11. Historical Information: *A12. Age: Prehistoric Protohistoric 1542-1769 1769-1848 1848-1880 1880-1914 1914-1945 Post 1945 Undetermined Describe position in regional prehistoric chronology or factual historic dates if known: No structure is present here in aerial photographs taken in 1948. The next oldest aerial photograph in 1959 shows a structure in this location. A13. Interpretations (Discuss data potential, function[s], ethnic affiliation, and other interpretations): This is the remaining foundation from one of several structures built from 1948 to 1959, and then demolished between 1980 and 2009. A14. Remarks: A15. References (Documents, informants, maps, and other references): NETRONLINE. n.d. Historic Aerials map viewer. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. Accessed May 6, 2024. A16. Photographs (List subjects, direction of view, and accession numbers or attach a Photograph Record.): Original Media/Negatives Kept at: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North Fifth Street, Redlands, CA 92374 *A17. Form Prepared by: Steve Wintergerst Date: May 6, 2024 Affiliation and Address: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North Fifth Street, Redlands, CA 92374 DPR 523C (1/95) *Required information State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 3 of 6 *Resource Name or # FW-3 *Recorded by: Casey Lejeune *Date: October 23, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View east. FW-3 October 23, 2023. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 4 of 6 *Resource Name or # FW-3 *Recorded by: Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update Resource FW-3 represents the remains of former residential structures that date to the 20th century. Archival research could not associate this resource with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our local, regional, state, or national history (NRHP/CRHR Criterion A/1). The owner(s) could not be identified as a person(s) of significance or importance to the local, state, or national past (NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2). The resource represents the remains of a former residence and therefore lacks any design characteristics unique to itself; as such, it does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic values; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction (NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3). The resource lacks any surface artifacts or evidence of subsurface deposits that could provide data to address questions regarding social status or participation in the larger economy. The data potential of this resource has been exhausted by its recording and archival research; as such, it does not have the potential to yield information important to the local, state, or national history or prehistory (NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4). In sum, FW-3 does not contribute to any known or suspected historic districts and is not considered a Historic Property for the purpose of NHPA Section 106, nor a Historical Resource under CEQA. DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information FW-3 EC O R P : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x / F W P F W - 3 D P R L o c a t i o n 2 0 2 3 1 1 2 1 - k e d w a r d s 1 1 / 2 1 / 2 0 2 3 DPR 523J (1/95)*Required Information 0 500 1,000250 Meters 0 2,000 4,0001,000 FeetI 1:24,000*Scale: *Date of Map: 1996 *Resource Name or #: FW-3Page 5 of 6 *Map Name: Devore, CA Primary # HRI # Trinomial State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION LOCATION MAP *Resource Name or #: FW-3Page 6 of 6 *Drawn By: Casey LeJeune *Date: 10/23/2023 State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SKETCH MAP Primary # HRI # Trinomial DPR 523K (1/95)*Required Information Map Contents Site Boundary Dirt Road Lo c a t i o n : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x - F W P F W - 3 S k e t c h M a p 2 0 2 3 1 1 2 1 ( k e d w a r d s - 1 1 / 2 1 / 2 0 2 3 ) 0 157.5 Meters I 0 50 10025 Feet DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 7 *Resource Name or #: FW-4 P1. Other Identifier: FW-4 *P2. Location: ☒ Not for Publication ☐ Unrestricted *a. County: San Bernardino and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Devore, CA Date: 1996 T01NS; R06W; SW ¼ of NE ¼ of Section 36 S.B.B.M. c. Address: 6725 Knox Avenue City: Fontana Zip: 92335 d. UTM: 11S 457488mE/3776876mN NAD 83 e. Other Locational Data: From the intersection of Sierra Avenue and South Highland Avenue, turn left and head west on South Highland Avenue for 1.51 miles to the intersection of South Highland Avenue and Knox Boulevard. Turn left and go south on Knox Boulevard for 0.13 mile to where the pavement on Knox Boulevard ends. From this point, the resource is 326 feet southeast of the paved end of Knox Boulevard. Elevation: 1,465 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). *P3a. Description: Resource FW-4 consists of two concrete slabs connected by a concrete footing. Both slabs and footing stand approximately 8 inches above the surrounding soil. Feature 1, the larger concrete pad, is located in the northeast corner of the site, and measures 11 feet east to west by 10 feet north to south. Feature 2, the smaller slab measures 3 feet north to south by 2 feet east to west. Feature 3, the border wall measures 24 feet north to south by 17 feet east to west. Both slabs have a red-colored stain on top and are covered in lichen. The border wall features 0.25-inch threaded bolts with nuts on top, and in some places, these hold down rotting 2 inch by 6 inch boards that sit atop the footing. The footing forms an enclosed rectangle with feature 1 as the northeast corner of the rectangle. Feature 2 attaches to the outer part of the southern perimeter of Feature 3. *P3b. Resource Attributes: AH2. Foundations/structure pads *P4. Resources Present: ☐ Building ☐ Structure ☐ Object ☒ Site ☐ District ☐ Element of District ☐ Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: Overview photo # 0532 View south, 10/23/2023. *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: ☒ Historic ☐ Prehistoric ☐ Both *P7. Owner and Address: Fontana Unified School District 9680 Citrus Ave Fontana, CA 92335-5571 *P8. Recorded by: Casey LeJeune ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North 5th Street Redlands, CA 92374 *P9. Date Recorded: 10/23/2023 *P10. Survey Type: Intensive *P11. Report Citation: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2024. Archaeological Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Walnut Property Project, San Bernardino County, California. Prepared for Diversified Pacific. *Attachments: ☐ NONE ☒ Location Map ☒ Sketch Map ☒ Continuation Sheet ☐ Building, Structure, and Object Record ☒ Archaeological Record ☐ District Record ☐ Linear Feature Record ☐ Milling Station Record ☐ Rock Art Record ☐ Artifact Record ☐ Photograph Record ☐ Other (List): State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Trinomial ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE RECORD Page 2 of 7 *Resource Name or #: FW-4 *A1. Dimensions: a. Length: 10 m. (N-S) × b. Width: 6 m. (E-W) Method of Measurement: Paced Taped Visual estimate Other: GPS Method of Determination (Check any that apply.): Artifacts Features Soil Vegetation Topography Cut bank Animal burrow Excavation Property boundary Other (Explain): Reliability of Determination: High Medium Low Explain: Foundations readily visible in mown weeds. Limitations (Check any that apply): Restricted access Paved/built over Site limits incompletely defined Disturbances Vegetation Other (Explain): Well-mowed, but some vegetation and modern trash obscures the soil surface. A2. Depth: None Unknown Method of Determination: Surface survey only. *A3. Human Remains: Present Absent Possible Unknown (Explain): Surface survey only. Remains unlikely due to type of resource present. *A4. Features (Number, briefly describe, indicate size, list associated cultural constituents, and show location of each feature on sketch map.): Feature 1: A concrete foundation in the northeast corner of the site, measuring 11 feet east to west by 10 feet north to south, raised 8 inches above the ground. Feature 2: A concrete foundation at the southern edge of the site, measuring 3 feet north to south by 2 feet east to west, and raised 8 inches above the ground. Feature 3: A concrete barrier/retainer that contains ferrous hardware. It connects to Feature 1 at the northwest and southeast corners, forming a square 24 feet north to south by 17 feet east to west, and Feature 2 adjoins its south wall. *A5. Cultural Constituents (Describe and quantify artifacts, ecofacts, cultural residues, etc., not associated with features.): None. *A6. Were Specimens Collected? No Yes (If yes, attach Artifact Record or catalog and identify where specimens are curated.) *A7. Site Condition: Good Fair Poor (Describe disturbances.): Structures have been demolished. Modern refuse surrounds this site. *A8. Nearest Water (Type, distance, and direction.): Etiwanda Creek, 2.6 miles northwest of resource. *A9. Elevation: 1,465 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) A10. Environmental Setting (Describe culturally relevant variables such as vegetation, fauna, soils, geology, landform, slope, aspect, exposure, etc.): Site is located on a gently-sloped southwest-facing floodplain in suburban foothills surrounded by residential structures. A11. Historical Information: *A12. Age: Prehistoric Protohistoric 1542-1769 1769-1848 1848-1880 1880-1914 1914-1945 Post 1945 Undetermined Describe position in regional prehistoric chronology or factual historic dates if known: Historical aerials show no development in this site as recently as 1948. A structure is present here in 1959. A13. Interpretations (Discuss data potential, function[s], ethnic affiliation, and other interpretations): This is the remaining foundation from one of several structures built from 1948 to 1959, and then demolished between 1980 and 2009. Feature 3 resembles an exterior wall for a structure with a crawl space, with feature 1 serving to support a kitchen or bathroom, and feature 2 serving as a doorstep. A14. Remarks: A15. References (Documents, informants, maps, and other references): NETRONLINE. n.d. Historic Aerials map viewer. https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. Accessed May 6, 2024. A16. Photographs (List subjects, direction of view, and accession numbers or attach a Photograph Record.): Original Media/Negatives Kept at: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North Fifth Street, Redlands, CA 92374 *A17. Form Prepared by: Steve Wintergerst Date: May 6, 2024 Affiliation and Address: ECORP Consulting, Inc. 215 North Fifth Street, Redlands, CA 92374 DPR 523C (1/95) *Required information State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 3 of 7 *Resource Name or # FW-4 *Recorded by: Casey Lejeune *Date: October 23, 2023 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View southeast, FW-4 concrete boundary. October 23, 2023. View north. FW-4 overview October 23, 2023. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 4 of 7 *Resource Name or # FW-4 *Recorded by: Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information View northeast, FW-4 overview. May 14, 2024. View south. FW-4, Feature 1. May 14, 2024. View South. FW-4, features 2 and 3. May 14, 2024. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 5 of 7 *Resource Name or # FW-4 *Recorded by: Steve Wintergerst *Date: May 14, 2024 Continuation Update Resource FW-4 represents the remains of former residential structures that date to the 20th century. Archival research could not associate this resource with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our local, regional, state, or national history (NRHP/CRHR Criterion A/1). The owner(s) could not be identified as a person(s) of significance or importance to the local, state, or national past (NRHP/CRHR Criterion B/2). The resource represents the remains of a former residence and therefore lacks any design characteristics unique to itself; as such, it does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; possess high artistic values; or represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction (NRHP/CRHR Criterion C/3). The resource lacks any surface artifacts or evidence of subsurface deposits that could provide data to address questions regarding social status or participation in the larger economy. The data potential of this resource has been exhausted by its recording and archival research; as such, it does not have the potential to yield information important to the local, state, or national history or prehistory (NRHP/CRHR Criterion D/4). In sum, FW-4 does not contribute to any known or suspected historic districts and is not considered a Historic Property for the purpose of NHPA Section 106, nor a Historical Resource under CEQA. DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information FW-4 EC O R P : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x / F W P F W - 4 D P R L o c a t i o n 2 0 2 3 1 1 2 1 - k e d w a r d s 1 1 / 2 1 / 2 0 2 3 DPR 523J (1/95)*Required Information 0 500 1,000250 Meters 0 2,000 4,0001,000 FeetI 1:24,000*Scale: *Date of Map: 1996 *Resource Name or #: FW-4Page 6 of 7 *Map Name: Devore, CA Primary # HRI # Trinomial State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION LOCATION MAP Feature 3 Feature 1 Feature 2 *Resource Name or #: FW-4Page 7 of 7 *Drawn By: Steve Wintergerst *Date: 05/14/2024 State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SKETCH MAP Primary # HRI # Trinomial DPR 523K (1/95)*Required Information Legend Site Boundary Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Lines Dirt Road Lo c a t i o n : N : \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 1 9 3 F o n t a n a W a l n u t P r o p e r t y \ M A P S \ C u l t u r a l _ R e s o u r c e s \ C u l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s . a p r x - F W P D P R S k e t c h F W - 0 4 2 0 2 4 0 5 2 2 ( k e d w a r d s - 5 / 2 2 / 2 0 2 4 ) 0 94.5 Meters I 0 3015 Feet